There may indeed be some parallel universe in which dd is preferable to Acronis, but it isn't the universe I inhabit! mpack Site Moderator Posts: 34757 Joined: 4. A dd image of the same drive would have taken considerably longer, and would have been 230GB. That time is very good, and the file size is manageable. is 19GB, and took about 15 minutes to create. For example the last Acronis backup I took of the C: drive on the PC I'm using right now.
The dd suggestion btw involves an image file equal in size to the disk being copied - which is far inferior to the Acronis method, which only copies used clusters, and it compresses them to save time and space. Is it possible to convert virtual machines to physical environments virtualbox virtual-machine bare-metal.
Better in that case to call it "output.raw". That is a bad habit to get into when the file is not actually an ISO container. Plus, I note you are still giving your "output.iso" file a ".iso" extension in your example. I already mentioned another working method - Acronis TrueImage - which I believe will suit the OP better. Priusz wrote:So I think the only working method is the one I linked, or maybe
0 kommentar(er)
