From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.


--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 2/13/2026 8:14 AM, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

I keep windows 11 and dual boot, and since I have a perpetual license for Acronis, I use it to backup my Linux partition. It's worked for me for years. It's also only the
2020 version.
Do you question your process? Have to verified it works? Like blowing out your entire docs folder and then trying to restore it?
Heck if it works fine.

I may try SyncBack and see how it works. I currently use mint's backup tool. It's a bit quirky to get setup but I do now and I make daily backups with it. But this only
makes snapshot tar files. Good for the OOPS conditions.

I also use rsync to do some mirroring now and then. It's very easy to script since it's basically 'cp'. rsync source dest. You just add the needed flags.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 13/02/2026 15:42, Alan K wrote:

On 2/13/2026 8:14 AM, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

I keep windows 11 and dual boot, and since I have a perpetual license
for Acronis, I use it to backup my Linux partition.-a

That's full backup. I'm looking for a tool for just backing up specific
data files /directories.

It's worked for me
for years.-a It's also only the 2020 version.
Do you question your process?-a Have to verified it works?-a Like blowing
out your entire docs folder and then trying to restore it?

Yes. SyncBack creates an identical data structure on the external drive.
'Restore' is just a matter of copying the directories back to the
desktop.

Heck if it works fine.

I may try SyncBack and see how it works.-a I currently use mint's backup tool.-a It's a bit quirky to get setup but I do now and I make daily
backups with it. But this only makes snapshot tar files.-a Good for the
OOPS conditions.

I also use rsync to do some mirroring now and then.-a It's very easy to script since it's basically 'cp'.-a rsync source dest.-a You just add the needed flags.

Hmm. I worry about going back to doing backups by command line
instructions. The two geeks who convinced me to migrate to Linux Mint
(my two sons) promised me that the experience would be 'no different to
using Windows' . I'm going to hold them to that promise ;-) .

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

Mint comes with "Backup Tool", but I prefer "Backups" (which is in the Software Manager, but unfortunately the SM is playing up at present and
never stops trying to generate the cache. The usual method of dealing
with this by changing from a local mirror to default doesn't help. Maybe
it's the Ubuntu repo which is the problem). It's really "D|-j|a Dup". You might want to read this thread first if you tend to use flatpak versions. <https://community.linuxmint.com/software/view/deja-dup>

I've been using it to backup to three separate USB drives (grandfather, father, son) for many years. On the rare occasion I've had to restore something it's been fine. The only thing I'm not so keen on is that when
you set prefs you click on an "x" to close the screen rather than click
on a back arrow.
--
Jeff
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 2/13/26 11:29 AM, occam wrote:

On 13/02/2026 15:42, Alan K wrote:

On 2/13/2026 8:14 AM, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

I keep windows 11 and dual boot, and since I have a perpetual license
for Acronis, I use it to backup my Linux partition.

That's full backup. I'm looking for a tool for just backing up specific
data files /directories.

Not really, Acronis can do incremental, but I don't really need it for that. If my
documents folder got messed up, I'd just open the last full backup (as Acronis will auto
mount any backup) and then just drag and drop the document folder over. It's no worse
than most any other backup. At least to me. I've never in all the years of this, never
done incremental. I've done piecemeal backups, you know, cherry picking specific folders.

It's worked for me
for years.-a It's also only the 2020 version.
Do you question your process?-a Have to verified it works?-a Like blowing
out your entire docs folder and then trying to restore it?

Yes. SyncBack creates an identical data structure on the external drive.
'Restore' is just a matter of copying the directories back to the
desktop.

Heck if it works fine.

I may try SyncBack and see how it works.-a I currently use mint's backup
tool.-a It's a bit quirky to get setup but I do now and I make daily
backups with it. But this only makes snapshot tar files.-a Good for the
OOPS conditions.

I also use rsync to do some mirroring now and then.-a It's very easy to
script since it's basically 'cp'.-a rsync source dest.-a You just add the
needed flags.

Hmm. I worry about going back to doing backups by command line
instructions. The two geeks who convinced me to migrate to Linux Mint
(my two sons) promised me that the experience would be 'no different to
using Windows' . I'm going to hold them to that promise ;-) .

Yeah right! They aren't the same so thus they are different. However there are a lot of
correlations. I jump back and forth between win and linux since my wife uses only
windows and I support her.

I totally understand the command line problem. It's good to do if you're given a "run
this" suggestion, but building something from get go isn't for everyone. I did it back in
the mid 70's on a Unix type system, then later on real SCO Unix and Zenix systems, and
then once I got a PC of my own I played with trying Linux Red Hat, but never found a need
for it.

It was Windows 8.0 that started me looking into an alternate.

Anyway, if you're looking for alternates for Windows software you might look at https://alternativeto.net/
I don't profuse that they have the final word on replacements.
--
Linux Mint 22.3, Mozilla Thunderbird 140.7.1esr, Mozilla Firefox 147.0.3
Alan K.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Fri, 2/13/2026 8:14 AM, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

SyncBack Touch (reach into LM and copy stuff out to "backup machine")

https://www.2brightsparks.com/syncback/sbt.html

"SyncBack Touch supports: macOS, Android, Linux & Windows"

https://www.2brightsparks.com/syncback/compare.html

Pro Se Free
^^^ ^^ ^^^^

(Works with (No Linux capability)
Touch SW)

"SyncBack Touch is free to use with SyncBackPro/SE V11"

Paul

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 14:14:31 +0100, occam wrote:

My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows the synching
of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the need for a
full backup every time.

Does it let you keep multiple point-in-time backups? Without
duplicating unchanged files?
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 17:29:09 +0100, occam wrote:

Hmm. I worry about going back to doing backups by command line
instructions.

On *nix systems, you save the effort of performing repetitive or
complicated command lines by saving them in shell scripts.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:34:42 -0500, Alan K. wrote:

Acronis can do incremental, but I don't really need it for that.

The nice thing about rsync is, its --link-dest option lets you create incremental backups that look like full backups for restoration
purposes. It saves space by not making additional copies of files that havenrCOt changed, but because standard POSIX/*nix filesystems allow the
same file to be linked into multiple directories, that same file can
appear in multiple snapshots taken at different times, and restored
from any of them.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

These tools are great if you want easy file or folder backups without
much setup:

Doja Dup Backups <https://apps.gnome.org/en-GB/DejaDup/>
A user-friendly GUI backup tool (often installed by default on GNOME desktops). Supports scheduled backups, encryption, and cloud services (e.g., Google Drive).

TimeShift <https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift>
Creates system snapshots (like Windows System Restore). Ideal for restoring your system after a bad update or change

GNOME Backups <https://help.gnome.org/gnome-help/backup-how.html>
Simple graphical backup utility with scheduled backups and
incremental support.

rsync <https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-use-rsync-for-local-and-remote-data-transfer-and-synchronization/>

The classic file-sync tool. Efficient and scriptable for custom backups, network backups, and incremental copies.


rclone <https://rclone.org/>
Syncs and backs up to cloud storage providers (Google Drive, OneDrive, S3, etc.).




--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Fri, 2/13/2026 4:59 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 17:29:09 +0100, occam wrote:

Hmm. I worry about going back to doing backups by command line
instructions.

On *nix systems, you save the effort of performing repetitive or
complicated command lines by saving them in shell scripts.

Yes, occam would have been using .bat on his previous platform.
*indows systems are computers too. In fact .ps1 scripting on *indows is a thing.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 13/02/2026 22:03, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:34:42 -0500, Alan K. wrote:

Acronis can do incremental, but I don't really need it for that.

The nice thing about rsync is, its --link-dest option lets you create incremental backups that look like full backups for restoration
purposes. It saves space by not making additional copies of files that havenrCOt changed, but because standard POSIX/*nix filesystems allow the
same file to be linked into multiple directories, that same file can
appear in multiple snapshots taken at different times, and restored
from any of them.

That's a mixed blessing. If the single set of blocks in the backup gets corrupted, all "copies" are affected. Unlike a normal backup.

That said, I use 'timeshift' and 'back in time', which are front ends
for rsync. Seems to work well enough, although some care over mailbox
backup is warranted.
--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Fri, 2/13/2026 2:28 PM, Paul wrote:

On Fri, 2/13/2026 8:14 AM, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

SyncBack Touch (reach into LM and copy stuff out to "backup machine")

https://www.2brightsparks.com/syncback/sbt.html

"SyncBack Touch supports: macOS, Android, Linux & Windows"

https://www.2brightsparks.com/syncback/compare.html

Pro Se Free
^^^ ^^ ^^^^

(Works with (No Linux capability)
Touch SW)

"SyncBack Touch is free to use with SyncBackPro/SE V11"

Paul

Another option is this.

The examples here are likely meant to impress administrator-type IT people.
To use ssh in the way the examples are flung about here, there can be
things like dot file with the authorization information required to make it work.
You set up and verify your ssh first, before letting commands like this loose on top of ssh.

https://rdiff-backup.net/examples.html

You can find slightly toned-down examples here. The
stuff I've extracted from here, might be two local disk drives.
And starting with this, is so you can "learn how" first, using
a trivial example.

https://linux.die.net/man/1/rdiff-backup

For example, suppose in the past you have run:

rdiff-backup /usr /usr.backup

Now, you want a sub-section restored. You desire just
a version of /usr/local to come back for you. The author of this
command is restoring to a separate directory local.old to signify this
is the 3 day old version he was after. He could just as easily
have restored to /foo/local.old if he wanted.

rdiff-backup -r 3D /usr.backup/local /usr/local.old

The software also allows checking what incrementals exist.
This would allow showing which incrementals are available.
Then at least, it makes more sense to be specifying 3 days,
if you know there was a backup 3 days ago.

rdiff-backup -l /usr.backup

As with any software that involves data movement, you
have to create source directories and "practice your craft"
to see that everything works like you think it does.

Measuring directory size can give the wrong information and
scare the user. This is also true on Windows, where hardlinks
are not measured correctly. Linux makes some stab at this
(it sometimes gets them right), whereas Windows never does.
In any case, with some care, you'll figure out a way to see
that the incremental method is actually working and using
hardlinks for files which have not changed. Hardlinks use
the same inodes for the data in two files, and there will be
two file pointers sharing the same set of inodes. The inodes
are not "released" until all file pointers are deleted (/bin/rm).

This is still command line of course, but I've tried to tone
it down a bit so it isn't a giant script. It still has the
problem of understanding the implementation, which is no
different than Windows File History and understanding how
it works and what happens when you want to restore a deleted
file (which required restoring the directory that contained
the deleted file, then it comes back).

Paul



--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 13/02/2026 22:58, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 14:14:31 +0100, occam wrote:

My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows the synching
of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the need for a
full backup every time.

Does it let you keep multiple point-in-time backups? Without
duplicating unchanged files?

Not to the best of my knowledge.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 14/02/2026 00:08, Shimon wrote:

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

These tools are great if you want easy file or folder backups without
much setup:

D|-j|a Dup Backups <https://apps.gnome.org/en-GB/DejaDup/>
A user-friendly GUI backup tool (often installed by default on GNOME desktops). Supports scheduled backups, encryption, and cloud services (e.g., Google Drive).

TimeShift <https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift>
Creates system snapshots (like Windows System Restore). Ideal for restoring your system after a bad update or change

GNOME Backups <https://help.gnome.org/gnome-help/backup-how.html>
Simple graphical backup utility with scheduled backups and
incremental support.

rsync <https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-use-rsync-for-local-and-remote-data-transfer-and-synchronization/>

The classic file-sync tool. Efficient and scriptable for custom backups, network backups, and incremental copies.

rclone <https://rclone.org/>
Syncs and backs up to cloud storage providers (Google Drive, OneDrive, S3, etc.).

Wow! Thanks for the menu. I'll work my way down. (Deja Dup and rsync I
have already seen mentioned above.)

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 09:29:08 +0000, Mike Scott wrote:

On 13/02/2026 22:03, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:34:42 -0500, Alan K. wrote:

Acronis can do incremental, but I don't really need it for that.

The nice thing about rsync is, its --link-dest option lets you
create incremental backups that look like full backups for
restoration purposes. It saves space by not making additional
copies of files that havenrCOt changed, but because standard
POSIX/*nix filesystems allow the same file to be linked into
multiple directories, that same file can appear in multiple
snapshots taken at different times, and restored from any of them.

That's a mixed blessing. If the single set of blocks in the backup
gets corrupted, all "copies" are affected. Unlike a normal backup.

ItrCOs your choice.

That said, I use 'timeshift' and 'back in time', which are front
ends for rsync.

Do they give you that choice in now rsync operates?
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 04:20:20 -0500, Paul wrote:

On Fri, 2/13/2026 4:59 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 17:29:09 +0100, occam wrote:

Hmm. I worry about going back to doing backups by command line
instructions.

On *nix systems, you save the effort of performing repetitive or
complicated command lines by saving them in shell scripts.

Yes, occam would have been using .bat on his previous platform.
*indows systems are computers too. In fact .ps1 scripting on *indows
is a thing.

Yes, but unfortunately the Microsoft idea of a command line dates from
pre-Unix days.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 14:04:47 +0000, mick wrote:

I use this on windows and mint
https://freefilesync.org/

The answers to rCLWhat features make FreeFileSync unique?rCY <https://freefilesync.org/faq.php#features> donrCOt seem very rCLuniquerCY
...
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

occam wrote:

On 14/02/2026 00:08, Shimon wrote:

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

These tools are great if you want easy file or folder backups without
much setup:

D|-j|a Dup Backups <https://apps.gnome.org/en-GB/DejaDup/>
A user-friendly GUI backup tool (often installed by default on GNOME desktops). Supports scheduled backups, encryption, and cloud services (e.g., Google Drive).

TimeShift <https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift>
Creates system snapshots (like Windows System Restore). Ideal for restoring your system after a bad update or change

GNOME Backups <https://help.gnome.org/gnome-help/backup-how.html>
Simple graphical backup utility with scheduled backups and
incremental support.

rsync <https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-use-rsync-for-local-and-remote-data-transfer-and-synchronization/>

The classic file-sync tool. Efficient and scriptable for custom backups, network backups, and incremental copies.


rclone <https://rclone.org/>
Syncs and backs up to cloud storage providers (Google Drive, OneDrive, S3, etc.).

Wow! Thanks for the menu. I'll work my way down. (Deja Dup and rsync I
have already seen mentioned above.)

I could be wrong, but I think if you use Rescuezilla/Clonezilla you can extract files from the backup image
--
Linux Mint 22.3

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 12:15:23 +1100, Axel wrote:

I could be wrong, but I think if you use Rescuezilla/Clonezilla you
can extract files from the backup image

It is really easier to use a backup program/regime where the backups
are just simple filesystems in their own right.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

At Sat, 14 Feb 2026 17:22:56 +0100, occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

On 14/02/2026 00:08, Shimon wrote:

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

These tools are great if you want easy file or folder backups without
much setup:

D|-j|a Dup Backups <https://apps.gnome.org/en-GB/DejaDup/>
A user-friendly GUI backup tool (often installed by default on GNOME desktops). Supports scheduled backups, encryption, and cloud services (e.g., Google Drive).

TimeShift <https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift>
Creates system snapshots (like Windows System Restore). Ideal for restoring your system after a bad update or change

GNOME Backups <https://help.gnome.org/gnome-help/backup-how.html>
Simple graphical backup utility with scheduled backups and
incremental support.

rsync <https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-use-rsync-for-local-and-remote-data-transfer-and-synchronization/>

The classic file-sync tool. Efficient and scriptable for custom backups, network backups, and incremental copies.

rclone <https://rclone.org/>
Syncs and backs up to cloud storage providers (Google Drive, OneDrive, S3, etc.).

Wow! Thanks for the menu. I'll work my way down. (Deja Dup and rsync I
have already seen mentioned above.)

Timeshift uses rsync on the backend (or btrfs snapshots, which I don't
use.) It expects the backup media to be on the local machine, but I
use it to back up to an SanDisk Corp. Extreme Pro 55AF, which is
NVME over USB, 4TB. I also have a cron job to back up the Extreme Pro
to the NAS periodically. If I didn't have the Extreme Pro, I'd
use iSCSI with the NAS, which will appear as a local block device
on Linux (which means Timeshift will use it).

By default, Timeshift doesn't back up /home directories, but you
can configure it to do so.

It's a shame we can't convince the Timeshift maintainers to support
native backup to NFS...

I'm also using the Extreme Pro for Time machine backups from our
Mac Studio, which required setting up Samba on my workstation with
the "fruit" extensions...
--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 Mem: 258G
OS: Linux 6.19.0 D: Mint 22.3 DE: Xfce 4.18 (X11)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090Ti (24G) (590.48.01)
"I Have To Stop Now, My Fingers Are Getting Hoarse!"
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

vallor wrote:

At Sat, 14 Feb 2026 17:22:56 +0100, occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

On 14/02/2026 00:08, Shimon wrote:

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows >>>> the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

These tools are great if you want easy file or folder backups without
much setup:

D|-j|a Dup Backups <https://apps.gnome.org/en-GB/DejaDup/>
A user-friendly GUI backup tool (often installed by default on GNOME desktops). Supports scheduled backups, encryption, and cloud services (e.g., Google Drive).

TimeShift <https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift>
Creates system snapshots (like Windows System Restore). Ideal for restoring your system after a bad update or change

GNOME Backups <https://help.gnome.org/gnome-help/backup-how.html>
Simple graphical backup utility with scheduled backups and
incremental support.

rsync <https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-use-rsync-for-local-and-remote-data-transfer-and-synchronization/>

The classic file-sync tool. Efficient and scriptable for custom backups, network backups, and incremental copies.


rclone <https://rclone.org/>
Syncs and backs up to cloud storage providers (Google Drive, OneDrive, S3, etc.).

Wow! Thanks for the menu. I'll work my way down. (Deja Dup and rsync I
have already seen mentioned above.)

Timeshift uses rsync on the backend (or btrfs snapshots, which I don't
use.) It expects the backup media to be on the local machine, but I
use it to back up to an SanDisk Corp. Extreme Pro 55AF, which is
NVME over USB, 4TB. I also have a cron job to back up the Extreme Pro
to the NAS periodically. If I didn't have the Extreme Pro, I'd
use iSCSI with the NAS, which will appear as a local block device
on Linux (which means Timeshift will use it).

By default, Timeshift doesn't back up /home directories, but you
can configure it to do so.

but if you do you will lose newer files added since the snapshot, and
existing files will be overwritten with the versions current when the
snapshot was taken. best to use timeshift without adding personal files
(the default setting) AND use Backup Tool to save personal files. Then
both apps can be used independently of each other. ie. so the OS and
personal files could be restored from different time periods, if
necessary. at least this is my understanding of it.

It's a shame we can't convince the Timeshift maintainers to support
native backup to NFS...

I'm also using the Extreme Pro for Time machine backups from our
Mac Studio, which required setting up Samba on my workstation with
the "fruit" extensions...

--
Linux Mint 22.3

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 15:45:39 +1100, Axel wrote:

but if you do you will lose newer files added since the snapshot,
and existing files will be overwritten with the versions current
when the snapshot was taken. best to use timeshift without adding
personal files (the default setting) AND use Backup Tool to save
personal files. Then both apps can be used independently of each
other. ie. so the OS and personal files could be restored from
different time periods, if necessary. at least this is my
understanding of it.

rsync can do both. Seems simpler to use something at least based on
that.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sat, 2/14/2026 8:15 PM, Axel wrote:

occam wrote:

On 14/02/2026 00:08, Shimon wrote:

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows >>>> the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

These tools are great if you want easy file or folder backups without
much setup:

D|-j|a Dup Backups <https://apps.gnome.org/en-GB/DejaDup/>
A user-friendly GUI backup tool (often installed by default on GNOME desktops). Supports scheduled backups, encryption, and cloud services (e.g., Google Drive).

TimeShift <https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift>
Creates system snapshots (like Windows System Restore). Ideal for restoring your system after a bad update or change

GNOME Backups <https://help.gnome.org/gnome-help/backup-how.html>
Simple graphical backup utility with scheduled backups and
incremental support.

rsync <https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-use-rsync-for-local-and-remote-data-transfer-and-synchronization/>

The classic file-sync tool. Efficient and scriptable for custom backups, network backups, and incremental copies.


rclone <https://rclone.org/>
Syncs and backs up to cloud storage providers (Google Drive, OneDrive, S3, etc.).

Wow! Thanks for the menu. I'll work my way down. (Deja Dup and rsync I
have already seen mentioned above.)

I could be wrong, but I think if you use Rescuezilla/Clonezilla you can extract files from the backup image

https://www.partimage.org/

...alternatives such as fsarchiver, partclone, or filesystems tools such as xfsdump.

Limitations

Partimage does not support ext4 or btrfs filesystems.
...
Single files or directories cannot be restored. [implies they don't have a "mounter"]

https://www.fsarchiver.org/

...file-system can be restored on a partition which has a different size
and it can be restored on a different file-system

Support for all major Linux filesystems (extfs, xfs, btrfs, reiserfs, etc)
if you create a snapshot in a btrfs volume... it will just
backup the contents seen when you mount the partition [does not "understand" that format itself]
Support for FAT filesystems (in order to backup/restore EFI System Partitions)
Experimental support for cloning ntfs filesystems [most softwares rightly fear the C: partition :-) ]

https://partclone.org/

Partclone... save and restore used blocks on a partition

None of those seem to support mounting like commercial backup softwares do it. But fsarchiver has the "smell" of being closest to being mount-able. Because
of its claims about "restoring on a different file-system".

https://github.com/fdupoux/fsarchiver/issues/96

...No

The thing is, at least one commercial backup product, uses a block level approach to the output it creates, yet it also has a file-by-file orientation as well, and if restored into a smaller partition, it achieves a bit of defragmentation as well. And that product also supports mounting with its
own proprietary mounter (and a FUSE-like mount approach). There are softwares of sufficient sophistication to be "practically magical".

Whoever writes this in the future though, BTRFS is likely to be the last file system they handle (feature set complexity layered on top of file system complexity).

And if you are thinking of writing your own software for this, one
small developer of backup software claimed he kept *200* disk images
in his test bench, as examples of curve balls needing test. I guess he
had trouble tickets and collected examples as part of that, and that is
just to give you some idea how much test goes into doing projects like this. You can't just backup your own hard drive and call it a day.

The code must be defensively designed. A customer might not know that
two of their partitions overlap and are about to corrupt. The backup
software must detect things that the user is not normally alerted about,
before the backup starts. Like, doing a read-only fsck as a check that the partition is worth backing up, could be an ingredient in your code.

If your backup software refuses to back up a disk, due to structural problems, you can still do a backup with "dd". That, at least, preserves things while
you work on a solution.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sat, 2/14/2026 5:17 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 14:04:47 +0000, mick wrote:

I use this on windows and mint
https://freefilesync.org/

The answers to rCLWhat features make FreeFileSync unique?rCY <https://freefilesync.org/faq.php#features> donrCOt seem very rCLuniquerCY ...

This one stands out for me.

"Cross-platform: Runs on Windows, Linux, macOS "

The rest of it is mostly tick boxes.

And the standard limitation on all of these products, is
not having utilities that can detect whether they are
working properly or not. You have to test these products
before you can accept them.

One product for example, did not restore GPT Attributes word
properly, meaning "what was restored was not EXACTLY what
was backed up". A trouble ticket raised got that corrected.
It took human eyeballs and some symptoms to detect that one.

One product, if you Google and look at the historical record,
it couldn't even manage to do a FAT32 backup and restore properly.
When that happens, you know it isn't an actual problem with the
backup portion. That's a failure to do the safety checks
first (FSCK before backup), that would be why a particular
backup and restore did not work.

There is a lot more FSCK going on now, than may have been
apparent in the past. Which can contribute to fewer screwed
up file systems.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sat, 2/14/2026 4:29 AM, Mike Scott wrote:

On 13/02/2026 22:03, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:34:42 -0500, Alan K. wrote:

Acronis can do incremental, but I don't really need it for that.

The nice thing about rsync is, its --link-dest option lets you create
incremental backups that look like full backups for restoration
purposes. It saves space by not making additional copies of files that
havenrCOt changed, but because standard POSIX/*nix filesystems allow the
same file to be linked into multiple directories, that same file can
appear in multiple snapshots taken at different times, and restored
from any of them.

That's a mixed blessing. If the single set of blocks in the backup gets corrupted, all "copies" are affected. Unlike a normal backup.

<snip>

Some products support Verify, which allows you to detect some failure situations.
You can repeat the backup sequence to two drives, if you consider this
failure condition to be a factor.

On one machine, I was randomly running Verify on some things, when I got a failure.
I checked backwards in time, and perhaps two other backups also failed.

And this was traceable to bad RAM. Once the RAM was tested (and the whole
set of DIMMs replaced), the Verify errors stopped happening. The RAM error seemed
to be in low memory, but I could not locate it by testing each DIMM individually
(with memtest). Bus loading effects can account for this (contributing factor).

In general terms, a Full+Incrementals tends to have a higher failure
rate anyway, than a Full alone. While there is an implementation
of Incrementals-Forever (which "synthesizes" a Full from a
previous set of Full+Incremental), it is unclear how thorough
a job that does of vetting materials along the way.

Fulls are expensive, but there's no question they get the job done.
There is less guess-work, and the scheme could even have a Verify
for you (restore to /dev/null).

I don't think I've ever had a Verify failure on a backup, that was
traceable to a bad block. My shitty drive collection, those
drives were recognizes early on as less than saintly, and they
never got used for backing up anything important. I have
around eight hard drives, and ten SSDs, that would not be
rated as "backup holders", due to the fact they already
show signs of being shitty items. The SSDs are TLC based
(which is OK), which seem to lack firmware to "freshen"
blocks which have become mushy (which is bad). Just because
a drive is cheap, does not mean the firmware has to be
bad as well. Another manufacturer learned the lesson
about TLC maintenance and offered a firmware flash to help.

And as hard drive prices rise, there's not much chance
the people who really need backups, are going to get them now :-)
For example, there is "a" backup drive in town, for $589. Bargain.

Paul

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 14/02/2026 22:13, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 09:29:08 +0000, Mike Scott wrote:

On 13/02/2026 22:03, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:34:42 -0500, Alan K. wrote:

Acronis can do incremental, but I don't really need it for that.

The nice thing about rsync is, its --link-dest option lets you
create incremental backups that look like full backups for
restoration purposes. It saves space by not making additional
copies of files that havenrCOt changed, but because standard
POSIX/*nix filesystems allow the same file to be linked into
multiple directories, that same file can appear in multiple
snapshots taken at different times, and restored from any of them.

That's a mixed blessing. If the single set of blocks in the backup
gets corrupted, all "copies" are affected. Unlike a normal backup.

ItrCOs your choice.

Quite. But one needs to consider side effects of any choice.

That said, I use 'timeshift' and 'back in time', which are front
ends for rsync.

Do they give you that choice in now rsync operates?

For back-in-time, not explicitly AFAICS: the point of the links, is
after all, to save space. But there is an option to use checksums, which would, presumably, catch a corrupted block and make a fresh copy.
--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 14:57:16 +0000, Mike Scott wrote:

On 14/02/2026 22:13, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

Do they give you that choice in now rsync operates?

For back-in-time, not explicitly AFAICS: the point of the links, is
after all, to save space. But there is an option to use checksums,
which would, presumably, catch a corrupted block and make a fresh
copy.

rsync uses checksums as a quick-and-dirty way of detecting most
differences, while resorting to more thorough hash computations to
confirm identity.

Do your backup apps do this kind of checking?
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 07:19:45 -0500, Paul wrote:

Some products support Verify, which allows you to detect some
failure situations.

With rsync, you just repeat the rsync command, which picks up missing
or mismatched files. For good measure, add the --checksum option,
which forces it to re-read the actual contents of the destination
copies, to confirm they match exactly.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 15:04:46 +0000, Mike Scott wrote:

Not forgetting about, eg, /var/mail/* which counts as "user"
territory.

This is why I have my MTAs configured to use maildir format.

Anywhere else ??

There are also user crontabs in /var/spool/cron, but again those go
away if you use systemd timers instead.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 2/15/2026 3:23 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 06:37:31 -0500, Paul wrote:

That's a failure to do the safety checks first (FSCK before backup)
...

Not sure why that would be necessary, unless yourCOre doing low-level
access to the volume and bypassing the filesystem code in the kernel.

Otherwise you can rely on the kernel to ensure the filesystem is fit
to access -- that is the authoritative implementation of the filesystem-access code, after all.

Do you remember the old SunOS OS and the file system there ?
That used to regularly tip over.

And it used to take forever to start, and read the filesystem
and make sure it would work.

We had two guys who went on a SunOS driver designer course,
and while we did not get a demo of their coding skills later
to look at, the two of them were excellent at repairing
various broken linkages in the filesystem.

That's the part I remember about the old days, where the OS
didn't particularly do a good job handling filesystems,
and you could be regularly faced with brokenness and no
forward progress. It was even fun watching them work,
as one would say "do you think it is this problem?",
and they would be working through a mental flowchart, and
between the two of them, they *always* tipped the filesystem
upright. My fear was, that if only one of our guys was
available, this scheme would not work, without a person
to bounce ideas off.

You couldn't always trust FSCK, and giving permission to
"do something" could trash it.

Paul

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 17:01:06 -0500, Paul wrote:

On Sun, 2/15/2026 3:23 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 06:37:31 -0500, Paul wrote:

That's a failure to do the safety checks first (FSCK before
backup) ...

Not sure why that would be necessary, unless yourCOre doing low-level
access to the volume and bypassing the filesystem code in the
kernel.

Otherwise you can rely on the kernel to ensure the filesystem is
fit to access -- that is the authoritative implementation of the
filesystem-access code, after all.

Do you remember the old SunOS OS and the file system there ? That
used to regularly tip over.

And it used to take forever to start, and read the filesystem and
make sure it would work.

We have journalled filesystems now.

So, to get back to my original question, what was the need for rCLFSCK
before backuprCY, again?
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 2/15/2026 6:35 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 17:01:06 -0500, Paul wrote:

On Sun, 2/15/2026 3:23 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 06:37:31 -0500, Paul wrote:

That's a failure to do the safety checks first (FSCK before
backup) ...

Not sure why that would be necessary, unless yourCOre doing low-level
access to the volume and bypassing the filesystem code in the
kernel.

Otherwise you can rely on the kernel to ensure the filesystem is
fit to access -- that is the authoritative implementation of the
filesystem-access code, after all.

Do you remember the old SunOS OS and the file system there ? That
used to regularly tip over.

And it used to take forever to start, and read the filesystem and
make sure it would work.

We have journalled filesystems now.

So, to get back to my original question, what was the need for rCLFSCK
before backuprCY, again?

It's to make sure that when you read metadata from the file system,
it can successfully be used to put everything back.

The representation can be block-based (inodes/clusters), plus it also
has metadata for the location of files. This is what allows restoration
into a smaller partition at restore time. The file metadata allows switching
to file mode. Whereas the block-based part that records something, that's
only good enough by itself for block-based restoral into an identically
sized partition.

In terms of behavior, a restore that is block based only, reading the
backup is "smooth" and laying down the blocks is "smooth". Whereas if
you ask for the files to be placed into a smaller partition, at least
one side of the operation is noisy due to the need to randomly seek.
This could change, depending on the algorithm used for restoring
(whether it tries to defragment, or it lets things go-to-hell
on a restore in the file-by-file mode). But with sufficient file metadata stored (at the end of the backup session), it can do just about
anything needed, during a restore.

In an era where we "constantly repair" filesystems, there should
be little chance of the "buildup of latent faults". It was
latent faults, like one file system problem layered on top
of a second file system problem, that caused filesystems to tip
over. And this is why, today, there is so much checking for
"clean" when the system starts. It's not only that the file
system is journaled, even for unjournaled filesystems the
amount of maintenance the filesystem receives, it's more
frequent. I seem to remember there might have been a policy
where a full fsck is only done every 100 boots or so. And if
we went back even further in time, there might have been
no scheduled fsck at all. It was up to the administrator
to do the fsck (and answer the questions, and the questions
were always "skill testing" so mere users wanted no part of that).

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 13/02/2026 13:14, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

If you want to sync between different operating systems then I suggest
watch this video:

<https://youtu.be/pl3PWny2kao>

Syncthing is a free, open-source, continuous file synchronization
program that keeps your files perfectly in sync across all your devices
in real time, with zero companies spying on your data.

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 02:43:51 +0000, Shimon wrote:

Syncthing is a free, open-source, continuous file synchronization
program ...

Not the same as rCLbackuprCY though, is it ... unless you only want to
count *current* files, rather than snapshots of what has gone before
...
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 19:07:02 -0500, Paul wrote:

On Sun, 2/15/2026 6:35 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

So, to get back to my original question, what was the need for rCLFSCK
before backuprCY, again?

It's to make sure that when you read metadata from the file system,
it can successfully be used to put everything back.

Not sure why that would be necessary, unless yourCOre doing low-level
access to the volume and bypassing the filesystem code in the kernel.

Otherwise you can rely on the kernel to ensure the filesystem is fit
to access -- that is the authoritative implementation of the
filesystem-access code, after all.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 2026-02-13, Alan K <AlanK@invalid.com> wrote:

On 2/13/2026 8:14 AM, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

I keep windows 11 and dual boot, and since I have a perpetual license for Acronis, I use it to backup my Linux partition. It's worked for me for years. It's also only the
2020 version.
Do you question your process? Have to verified it works? Like blowing out your entire docs folder and then trying to restore it?

Are you able to restore the backup to a temp/partition disk?

Heck if it works fine.

But what if it does not and its the only copy you have?

I may try SyncBack and see how it works. I currently use mint's backup tool. It's a bit quirky to get setup but I do now and I make daily backups with it. But this only
makes snapshot tar files. Good for the OOPS conditions.

Not if it will not restore.

I also use rsync to do some mirroring now and then. It's very easy to script since it's basically 'cp'. rsync source dest. You just add the needed flags.

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 2026-02-16, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 02:43:51 +0000, Shimon wrote:

Syncthing is a free, open-source, continuous file synchronization
program ...

Not the same as rCLbackuprCY though, is it ... unless you only want to
count *current* files, rather than snapshots of what has gone before
...

More to the point we are getting the waters mudded. This thread is about Backups. A programme which sync autmatically is a dangerous tool.

The Unix philosophy is to have one tool that just does one thing well.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Sun, 2/15/2026 11:04 PM, Gordon wrote:

On 2026-02-13, Alan K <AlanK@invalid.com> wrote:

On 2/13/2026 8:14 AM, occam wrote:

I'm currently transitioning from Windows to Linux Mint (under dual
boot). Before I abandon Win10 for good I want to be sure I am able do
everything in LM that I normally do under Win10.

Is there an LM way of backing up /synchronising my data files onto an
external drive? My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows
the synching of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the
need for a full backup every time. It shows me which files are to be
deleted, which are to be updated and which are new files to be
transferred - displayed in an easy-to-follow screen.

Thanks for any pointers.

I keep windows 11 and dual boot, and since I have a perpetual license for Acronis,
I use it to backup my Linux partition. It's worked for me for years. It's also only the
2020 version.

Do you question your process? Have to verified it works?
Like blowing out your entire docs folder and then trying to restore it?

Are you able to restore the backup to a temp/partition disk?

Heck if it works fine.

But what if it does not and its the only copy you have?

I may try SyncBack and see how it works. I currently use mint's backup tool.
It's a bit quirky to get setup but I do now and I make daily backups with it. But this only
makes snapshot tar files. Good for the OOPS conditions.

Not if it will not restore.

I also use rsync to do some mirroring now and then. It's very easy to script
since it's basically 'cp'. rsync source dest. You just add the needed flags.

Your responses suggests a quite-unreliable storage model in your mind.
I have had bad blocks -- but on a refurb computer and its included disk.
Just not on the disks I use for backups.

The beauty of the Acronis or Macrium or even (heaven forbid) the Ghost,
was that they could mount the output image, like the .tib or .mrimg as
a FUSE-like file system.

For example, right now, I can back up C: to .mrimg, mount it as K: ,
turn off the permissions on K: and visit places I would normally not
be able to go. K: is read-only and you cannot damage the .mrimg .
And the .mrimg has some kind of primitive repair capability (implying
hashes at some level), but I've not had a demonstration of this.
I suppose I could experimentally damage a .mrimg and see if it recovers.
It would likely be easier to just read the manual.

[Picture] Use the "Download Original" button if the picture is fuzzy

https://i.postimg.cc/4ybV99x7/Macrium-mounter.gif

Does the product have limits ? Yes. When it backs up an EXT4, you cannot
mount the EXT4 without some other third party help (at a minimum). The GUIDs
of partitions are similarly NOT going to be changed on a restore for those. While EXT4 does use smart backup (only blocks with data are output),
it cannot do the demo in the picture. But it's still a backup and
it is still a "protection against failed hard drive" capability.
I can back up a multiboot disk, and have the entire thing restored
without a stitch of work. No slaving over a command line. No solving
puzzles with BLKID and so on.

I have had "bad" Verifies, but it was caused by bad RAM on the
source computer, in the hard drive buffer pool area. And fortunately
(purely by accident), the Verify just happened to cover the
section that was causing the corruption. Not all failures ("my
computer not being a computer") are detected by hashing schemes.
But that failure was in just the right place, for the Verify
to catch it.

While a backup system could use PAR2 blocks, it's unlikely any
commercial operation will resort to that, because "it's not mathematically robust". People use PAR2 every day, but I don't know what the properties
of such are at the moment (whether PAR2 failures-to-repair still happen).

The ultimate protection is to use two disk drives, and put
snapshots on both of them. (And run Verify on both, before
putting the disks away.)

Paul


--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 16/02/2026 05:26, Gordon wrote:

On 2026-02-16, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 02:43:51 +0000, Shimon wrote:

Syncthing is a free, open-source, continuous file synchronization
program ...

Not the same as rCLbackuprCY though, is it ... unless you only want to
count *current* files, rather than snapshots of what has gone before
...

More to the point we are getting the waters mudded. This thread is about Backups. A programme which sync autmatically is a dangerous tool.

I agree completely. I prefer backup (master > slave) more than syncing.
A recent syncing of my bookmarks on Firefox across platforms left me
with duplicates, redundancies and a lot of mess.

The Unix philosophy is to have one tool that just does one thing well.

Ah, the Promised Land... Linux. I'm waiting for the parting of the
waters any day now.

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Mon, 2/16/2026 7:33 AM, occam wrote:

On 16/02/2026 05:26, Gordon wrote:

On 2026-02-16, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 02:43:51 +0000, Shimon wrote:

Syncthing is a free, open-source, continuous file synchronization
program ...

Not the same as rCLbackuprCY though, is it ... unless you only want to
count *current* files, rather than snapshots of what has gone before
...

More to the point we are getting the waters mudded. This thread is about
Backups. A programme which sync autmatically is a dangerous tool.

I agree completely. I prefer backup (master > slave) more than syncing.
A recent syncing of my bookmarks on Firefox across platforms left me
with duplicates, redundancies and a lot of mess.

The Unix philosophy is to have one tool that just does one thing well.

Ah, the Promised Land... Linux. I'm waiting for the parting of the
waters any day now.

If you need a job, there's always work to do in Linux.

Write us some backup software :-) Mostly GUI work.

Paul


--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 03:33:37 -0500, Paul wrote:

And the .mrimg has some kind of primitive repair capability (implying
hashes at some level) ...

You need a bit more than hashes to do rCLrepair capabilityrCY. That means
error *correction*, not just *detection*.

For example, optical media make heavy use of Reed-Solomon
Cross-Interleave Redundancy Checking, applied at two separate levels:
one as an error-correction code and the other as an erasure code. As I
recall, on DVD, this redundancy overhead reduces the effective storage
capacity by about half.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Mon, 2/16/2026 3:30 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 03:33:37 -0500, Paul wrote:

And the .mrimg has some kind of primitive repair capability (implying
hashes at some level) ...

You need a bit more than hashes to do rCLrepair capabilityrCY. That means error *correction*, not just *detection*.

For example, optical media make heavy use of Reed-Solomon
Cross-Interleave Redundancy Checking, applied at two separate levels:
one as an error-correction code and the other as an erasure code. As I recall, on DVD, this redundancy overhead reduces the effective storage capacity by about half.

The product did not always have repair capability.

https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW80/Understanding+Image+Verification+Failures

"When an image is created each block of data (generally 64K but may be larger depending
on the partition size) has an MD5 hash digest created after it is read from the disk
and before it is written to the image file. This hash value is saved in the index
of the image file."

From the PDF manual, (V8 Page 177 printed at bottom of page)

"Backup verification checks the entire contents of backup files against MD5 message
digests (Hashes) created from the source data when the backup was created."

"If corruption is detected in a backed up data block then the current
live file system is checked to see if it contains the original data.
...
Note: Verification will halt on the first un-repairable block detected."

So it's a weak sauce. It repairs if it works out that the original
file is present and within reach. It has the disk identifiers from
when the disk was backed up, to use as part of comparison. You would
want to be running Verify then, first, rather than erasing the
source drive and trying to restore over top.

Repair then, is via "duplication", it relies on the original
disk to be around, and if a file hasn't changed, it can "save"
the session from being trashed. If you were overwriting the
original disk at the time, then that would have erased any chance
of doing a repair to the file.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 2026-02-15, Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

On 15/02/2026 04:45, Axel wrote:

but if you do you will lose newer files added since the snapshot, and
existing files will be overwritten with the versions current when the
snapshot was taken. best to use timeshift without adding personal files

Not forgetting about, eg, /var/mail/* which counts as "user" territory. Anywhere else ??

/etc ?

(the default setting) AND use Backup Tool to save personal files. Then
both apps can be used independently of each other. ie. so the OS and
personal files could be restored from different time periods, if
necessary. at least this is my understanding of it.

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 2026-02-15, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 12:15:23 +1100, Axel wrote:

I could be wrong, but I think if you use Rescuezilla/Clonezilla you
can extract files from the backup image

It is really easier to use a backup program/regime where the backups
are just simple filesystems in their own right.

Very true. Clonezilla is for cloning, not backing up. Fudging functions is
not best practice when there is many other backup programmes to choose from.

The real point is to get a set of programmes which suit the user and are trusted by the user.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On 2026-02-14, occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

On 13/02/2026 22:58, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 14:14:31 +0100, occam wrote:

My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows the synching
of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the need for a
full backup every time.

Does it let you keep multiple point-in-time backups? Without
duplicating unchanged files?

Not to the best of my knowledge.

Syncing is not a backup. Com'on people, know your tools and the task.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Mon, 2/16/2026 11:17 PM, Gordon wrote:

On 2026-02-14, occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

On 13/02/2026 22:58, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 14:14:31 +0100, occam wrote:

My favourite Windows program is SyncBack, which allows the synching
of the two drives (i.e. incremental backup) without the need for a
full backup every time.

Does it let you keep multiple point-in-time backups? Without
duplicating unchanged files?

Not to the best of my knowledge.

Syncing is not a backup. Com'on people, know your tools and the task.

The product has both Sync and Backup functions. And similar to
Retrospect, the backup server can be on one OS while the collectors
can be on another OS.

The Free version would appear to do Fulls,
the Paid version is Full, Incremental and Differential (the latter
two could be related to Fast Backup terminology).

https://www.2brightsparks.com/resources/articles/special-restore-cases.html

https://www.2brightsparks.com/syncback/compare.html

It's not much different than some other products, which offer Full
or Full+Differential for free, and charge for Incrementals capability.

The reason on Windows, that Fulls are given away for free, is Microsoft
has a Full backup capability (of sorts...) built into the OS. And this
gives some incentive for the ecosystem to give-away Full as promotional material. Having at least a Differential capability offers a bit
of space savings.

Paul





--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Mon, 2/16/2026 11:14 PM, Gordon wrote:

On 2026-02-15, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 12:15:23 +1100, Axel wrote:

I could be wrong, but I think if you use Rescuezilla/Clonezilla you
can extract files from the backup image

It is really easier to use a backup program/regime where the backups
are just simple filesystems in their own right.

Very true. Clonezilla is for cloning, not backing up. Fudging functions is not best practice when there is many other backup programmes to choose from.

The real point is to get a set of programmes which suit the user and are trusted by the user.

That's a backup done with Clonezilla (Device==>Image). The source is
an LM222 in a VM that happened to install into a single partition (/swapfile). The
Clonezilla run was from Live Media so that the OS disk backup target,
would be at rest.

mint@mint:/media/mint/BACKUP/2026-02-17-09-img$ ls -al
total 4655460
drwxrwxr-x 2 mint mint 4096 Feb 17 09:28 .
drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Feb 17 09:28 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1299 Feb 17 09:28 Info-OS-prober.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1891 Feb 17 09:28 Info-dmi.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 236 Feb 17 09:28 Info-img-id.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 58 Feb 17 09:28 Info-img-size.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 15239 Feb 17 09:28 Info-lshw.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1311 Feb 17 09:28 Info-lspci.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 171 Feb 17 09:28 Info-packages.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 94 Feb 17 09:28 Info-saved-by-cmd.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 588 Feb 17 09:28 blkdev.list
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 448 Feb 17 09:28 blkid.list
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4446 Feb 17 09:28 clonezilla-img
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 156 Feb 17 09:25 dev-fs.list
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4 Feb 17 09:28 disk
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5 Feb 17 09:28 parts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 36 Feb 17 09:28 sda-chs.sf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17408 Feb 17 09:28 sda-gpt-1st
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 16384 Feb 17 09:28 sda-gpt-2nd
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17920 Feb 17 09:28 sda-gpt.gdisk
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 552 Feb 17 09:28 sda-gpt.sgdisk
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 512 Feb 17 09:28 sda-mbr
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 244 Feb 17 09:28 sda-pt.parted
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 226 Feb 17 09:28 sda-pt.parted.compact
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 277 Feb 17 09:28 sda-pt.sf
-rwxrwxr-x 1 mint mint 4767020293 Feb 17 09:28 sda1.ext4-ptcl-img.gz chowned/chmodded, to copy this
for forensics...
mint@mint:/media/mint/BACKUP/2026-02-17-09-img$

One annoyance, is I didn't really want the partclone-img compressed.
But all it offers is compression options (these can slow down
your backup).

The source disk and partition were approximately 64GB, the content
about 13GB and the compressed result is as shown (about 4.7GB).

And that is suitable for disaster recovery (a "bad disk").

Paul

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 03:08:29 -0500, Paul wrote:

The Free version would appear to do Fulls, the Paid version is Full, Incremental and Differential (the latter two could be related to
Fast Backup terminology).

rsync gives you all that in the free version. And thatrCOs Free
software, not freeware.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 05:30:23 -0500, Paul wrote:

And that is suitable for disaster recovery (a "bad disk").

So really an all-or-nothing restore? No ability to selectively restore particular files that were deleted/corrupted/etc?
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Tue, 2/17/2026 4:37 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 03:08:29 -0500, Paul wrote:

The Free version would appear to do Fulls, the Paid version is Full,
Incremental and Differential (the latter two could be related to
Fast Backup terminology).

rsync gives you all that in the free version. And thatrCOs Free
software, not freeware.

The Windows backup programs, are intended to allow ordinary people
to make some kind of backup.

The very best attempt (in terms of a UI humans could use), was
one of the years Acronis did a spin of TIH. You could tell they
hired someone just for their storyboarding skills. The product
looks like it was peeled right off a storyboard. What stands out,
is how few clicks it takes to initiate a backup. But in later
years, Acronis got on a kick of larding up the product with
an AV, and that diluted the backup part of the package to
insignificance. Any time a package has twelve functions,
"it's own browser", you can hardly see the valuable parts
of the suite, for the garbage.

With Macrium, I just do Fulls, and not that often.
The Macrium file can be mounted by the Macrium software,
but there was also an "IMG2VHD.exe" converter for converting
a backup into a VHD. And VHD can be mounted by the OS, or
used in virtual machines.

The Windows backup program, the folder looks a lot like
the Clonezilla backup folder. But where Clonezilla uses partimage
files per partition, Microsoft uses a VHD per partition. And then
if you want, you can randomly access those if you want to extract
a single file. in Windows 7, the software used VHD files, and
in later OSes, at some point they switched to VHDX (which doesn't
have a 2.2TB capacity limit). and there are fewer tools for working
with that. 7ZIP (as a kind of equivalent to a libarchive) can
burrow into a VHD, but it is not set up for VHDX.

It is just good to have lots of options in the workflow, where
a user can get things done, without too much command line being needed.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Tue, 2/17/2026 4:38 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 05:30:23 -0500, Paul wrote:

And that is suitable for disaster recovery (a "bad disk").

So really an all-or-nothing restore? No ability to selectively restore particular files that were deleted/corrupted/etc?

I couldn't get anything to touch the partimage.
I tried Archive Manager, but it was not interested.

When the partimage is decompressed, like a TAR, you can
see the datablocks in there with your hex editor. It really
should share some characteristics with dynamic VHD, VDI and
so on. I haven't found a way to mount one. But maybe I'm not
looking hard enough.

Paul

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 18:43:15 -0500, Paul wrote:

On Tue, 2/17/2026 4:37 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 03:08:29 -0500, Paul wrote:

The Free version would appear to do Fulls, the Paid version is
Full, Incremental and Differential (the latter two could be
related to Fast Backup terminology).

rsync gives you all that in the free version. And thatrCOs Free
software, not freeware.

The Windows backup programs, are intended to allow ordinary people
to make some kind of backup.

Is rCLordinaryrCY some kind of synonym for rCLcredulousrCY? I ask because ...

[goes on to describe a GUI-based product that started out pleasant
to use and became enshittified]

The thing with Free software is: what you see is what you get. ItrCOs
never going to get enshittified, because that will be seen as a bug,
not a feature.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 18:48:33 -0500, Paul wrote:

On Tue, 2/17/2026 4:38 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 05:30:23 -0500, Paul wrote:

And that is suitable for disaster recovery (a "bad disk").

So really an all-or-nothing restore? No ability to selectively
restore particular files that were deleted/corrupted/etc?

I couldn't get anything to touch the partimage. I tried Archive
Manager, but it was not interested.

When the partimage is decompressed, like a TAR, you can see the
datablocks in there with your hex editor. It really should share
some characteristics with dynamic VHD, VDI and so on. I haven't
found a way to mount one. But maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

The KISS principle may be important in lots of software, but it seems
to me to be vital in backup software, particularly. This is because
the restoration function will often be exercised in a time of stress,
when data loss has already occurred, the customer/boss is breathing
down your neck, or in general your life is going to be seriously
buggered up if you canrCOt get the data back.

That is not the time to be discovering whether or not the restore
function actually works.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

Gordon wrote:

On 2026-02-15, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 12:15:23 +1100, Axel wrote:

I could be wrong, but I think if you use Rescuezilla/Clonezilla you
can extract files from the backup image

It is really easier to use a backup program/regime where the backups
are just simple filesystems in their own right.

Very true. Clonezilla is for cloning, not backing up.

it does disk imaging

Fudging functions is
not best practice when there is many other backup programmes to choose from.

The real point is to get a set of programmes which suit the user and are trusted by the user.

--
Linux Mint 22.3

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 20:55:18 +1100, Axel wrote:

Gordon wrote:

Clonezilla is for cloning, not backing up.

it does disk imaging

So does the rCLddrCY command.

<https://manpages.debian.org/dd(1)>
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Wed, 2/18/2026 4:02 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 20:55:18 +1100, Axel wrote:

Gordon wrote:

Clonezilla is for cloning, not backing up.

it does disk imaging

So does the rCLddrCY command.

<https://manpages.debian.org/dd(1)>

The difference in the example being, it does not
use the same space that dd does.

dd is just fine, in the right circumstances, like if
some partitions are damaged, and you want to preserve
the state of the disk while you experiment on recovery
solutions. dd does not care if you are not fsck-clean.

But for backing up perfectly good disks with fsck-clean
file systems, there are other things you can use.

64GB disk, OS content 13GB, Clonezilla compressed partimage 4.7GB.

Depending on the random contents of the white space on
the ~64GB partition, that random content might not
compress well. You can "prep" a disk for "dd" backup
by using zerofree, but that takes additional time as
part of a backup procedure. You can also loopback mount
partitions on an uncompressed dd file output... as long
as you know the offset. And you can work out the offset
using disktype analysis of the dd image.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

Paul wrote:

On Wed, 2/18/2026 4:02 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 20:55:18 +1100, Axel wrote:

Gordon wrote:

Clonezilla is for cloning, not backing up.

it does disk imaging

So does the rCLddrCY command.

<https://manpages.debian.org/dd(1)>

The difference in the example being, it does not
use the same space that dd does.

dd is just fine, in the right circumstances, like if
some partitions are damaged, and you want to preserve
the state of the disk while you experiment on recovery
solutions. dd does not care if you are not fsck-clean.

But for backing up perfectly good disks with fsck-clean
file systems, there are other things you can use.

64GB disk, OS content 13GB, Clonezilla compressed partimage 4.7GB.

Depending on the random contents of the white space on
the ~64GB partition, that random content might not
compress well. You can "prep" a disk for "dd" backup
by using zerofree, but that takes additional time as
part of a backup procedure. You can also loopback mount
partitions on an uncompressed dd file output... as long
as you know the offset. And you can work out the offset
using disktype analysis of the dd image.

I've used Foxclone in preference to Clonezilla, but I don't recall now
the reason. maybe just that the GUI is easier to use?

Paul

--
Linux Mint 22.3

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Tue, 2/17/2026 7:24 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 18:48:33 -0500, Paul wrote:

On Tue, 2/17/2026 4:38 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 05:30:23 -0500, Paul wrote:

And that is suitable for disaster recovery (a "bad disk").

So really an all-or-nothing restore? No ability to selectively
restore particular files that were deleted/corrupted/etc?

I couldn't get anything to touch the partimage. I tried Archive
Manager, but it was not interested.

When the partimage is decompressed, like a TAR, you can see the
datablocks in there with your hex editor. It really should share
some characteristics with dynamic VHD, VDI and so on. I haven't
found a way to mount one. But maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

The KISS principle may be important in lots of software, but it seems
to me to be vital in backup software, particularly. This is because
the restoration function will often be exercised in a time of stress,
when data loss has already occurred, the customer/boss is breathing
down your neck, or in general your life is going to be seriously
buggered up if you canrCOt get the data back.

That is not the time to be discovering whether or not the restore
function actually works.

I tried harder.

I found a method to mount a clonezilla partclone image and gain random access.

1) First, we use Clonezilla (a LinuxMint DVD is fine for this), and
make a backup of our source disk (sda) to BACKUP on (sdb).

When the dialog questions have all been answered, and Steve shows you
the command that is about to execute, you pretend to be advancing and
there is a chance to quit by answering "N" for No (one stanza later).

Now, you can enter the created-command and make small changes. Like
changing the compression option to -z0 from whatever Steve tells you.
This leaves the partclone images uncompressed.

/usr/sbin/ocs-sr -q2 -c -j2 -z0 -i 0 -sfsck -scs -senc -p true savedisk "2026-02-18-21-img" sda

2) Now, acquire a LiveDVD which has /dev/ndb block devices compiled into the kernel.
You are running as root, and so no "sudo" is required in the following.

Github
Name: rescuezilla-2.6.1-64bit.oracular.iso
Size: 1498515456 bytes (1429 MiB)
SHA256: 7EAA7318634D4831D9BDF2B683ACDCD68FB8DD42835FEE0DB8CB908DDFED2C74

cd to the BACKUP partition and the clonezilla image you just made.

cd /media/ubuntu/BACKUP/2026-02-18-21-img
partclone-nbd -c sda1.ext4-ptcl-img.uncomp # This makes the partclone a block device

In another terminal, you can mount the block device on a mount point (/mnt).

mount /dev/nbd0 /mnt # Guess-work, as to which /dev/nbd item to use

Now, cd to the random access file you were after.

cd /mnt/home/bullwinkle/Downloads/
cp background.bmp /path/to/destination...

3) When you are ready to exit...

In the copy-file terminal, unmount the /mnt

cd ~
umount /mnt

In the client nbd terminal

ctrl-c # The partclone-nbd program intercepts this, does orderly takedown on nbd0
# Ignore the printed notion an error occurred.

Now the LiveDVD can be shut down, just unmounting /media/ubuntu/BACKUP
remains as a command for cleanup before shutdown.

umount /media/ubuntu/BACKUP

The colorful session with terminals all over the screen, is here.

[Picture] Use "Download Original" if not clear

https://i.postimg.cc/d39BTprb/Mounting-Uncompressed-Partclone-Img.gif

Paul




--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 23:49:26 -0500, Paul wrote:

I found a method to mount a clonezilla partclone image and gain
random access.

[lots of rigmarole omitted]

ThatrCOs a helluva complicated way to gain access.

The rCLddrCY command I mentioned elsewhere can do a straight copy of a partition or entire disk to an image file, which can be directly
mounted using the regular rCLmountrCY command.

And then of course you can avoid the whole image business altogether,
by using rsync to do file-level backups, as we have discussed
(multiple times) before.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.os.linux.mint

On Thu, 2/19/2026 12:50 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 23:49:26 -0500, Paul wrote:

I found a method to mount a clonezilla partclone image and gain
random access.

[lots of rigmarole omitted]

ThatrCOs a helluva complicated way to gain access.

The rCLddrCY command I mentioned elsewhere can do a straight copy of a partition or entire disk to an image file, which can be directly
mounted using the regular rCLmountrCY command.

And then of course you can avoid the whole image business altogether,
by using rsync to do file-level backups, as we have discussed
(multiple times) before.

Well, I'm pleased to note that a "logical thing",
someone DID write the software for it. And despite
some comments by the guy writing the software, the
command line invocations are pretty simple.

Now, all it needs is some GUI butter to make a nice meal of it.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2