Welcome, Guest. Please Login
 
  HomeHelpSearchLogin FAQ Radified Ghost.Classic Ghost.New Bootable CD Blog  
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Ghost 2003 vs Ghost 8.x vs Ghost 11.x (Read 23395 times)
Nigel Bree
Ex Member




Back to top
Re: Ghost 2003 vs Ghost 8.x vs Ghost 11.x
Reply #15 - Aug 12th, 2008 at 4:13pm
 
TheShadow wrote on Aug 12th, 2008 at 8:28am:
I keep saying this and I guess no one's paying attention or doesn't understand what I'm saying (US English spoken here).

No, we understand perfectly.

TheShadow wrote on Aug 12th, 2008 at 8:28am:
NO, you can't take ghost images off of a hard drive, put them on DVD's and expect Ghost to restore them from the DVD's

This has always been possible, it simply required planning to do because of the limitations of ISO9660 filesystems in DOS when accessed through MSCSDEX (so, the base image and the spans had to have sensible 8.3 names).

Similar considerations apply to moving images; you can move them, but you need to ensure that the 8.3 names of the files are kept if you're working with a DOS-based version of Ghost.

In later current versions, this limitation is less important; every version we do does more to remove dependencies on this historical 8.3 limitation of DOS, especially when using Windows PE as the restore environment.
 
 
IP Logged
 

K Singh
Radmeister
**
Offline



Posts: 93
Devil's Paradise


Back to top
Re: Ghost 2003 vs Ghost 8.x vs Ghost 11.x
Reply #16 - Aug 18th, 2008 at 5:28am
 
Hi TheShadow

I agree with Nigel regarding the restoration. Maybe because my experience is only based on Ghost 8.3 or 11.

So far i can say on the moving of ghost images across harddisk and restoring. I have not tried DVD options.

I create a backup in my hdd by creating a backup folder in D/E drive (backing C drive). I give the name normally CImage. Let ghost add number extensions when i give the split option of 700 or 4GB.

I have tried moving it across HDDs(external USB hdd) and restore it from them. It works fine.

Quote:
Similar considerations apply to moving images; you can move them, but you need to ensure that the 8.3 names of the files are kept if you're working with a DOS-based version of Ghost.


I think Nigel has said it right. I didn't fiddle around with the names. Just kept the same what the ghost created.

Maybe will try it with DVDs and update you.
 
 
IP Logged
 
TheShadow
Kahuna
*****
Offline


Old Ghost user!

Posts: 613
Florida, USA


Back to top
Re: Ghost 2003 vs Ghost 8.x vs Ghost 11.x
Reply #17 - Aug 18th, 2008 at 5:43pm
 
I was specifically referring to making images to a hard drive and then moving them (burning them with Nero, etc.) to DVD's and expecting Ghost to ask for the second, third, etc., DVD to effect the restore.
Did I fail (again) to make myself clear?  Evidently!

English spoken here!

The 8.3 filename thingy really has nothing to do with what I was trying to say!

Sorry!
Shadow  Cool
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Nigel Bree
Ex Member




Back to top
Re: Ghost 2003 vs Ghost 8.x vs Ghost 11.x
Reply #18 - Aug 19th, 2008 at 2:17am
 
TheShadow wrote on Aug 18th, 2008 at 5:43pm:
I was specifically referring to making images to a hard drive and then moving them (burning them with Nero, etc.) to DVD's and expecting Ghost to ask for the second, third, etc., DVD to effect the restore.

That's exactly what I said works, and it does work, and it always has worked. I've done it plenty of times, doing this has been part of Ghost's design since about v3.0 when Plextor licensed it for their CD-ResQ product (or maybe they licensed 4.0, I forget) and the only real caveats are that a) you have to not be an idiot and use ISO9660 and not UDF so that MSCDEX can mount the disk, and b) if the 8.3 filenames aren't quite how Ghost wants during the restore it'll prompt at every span instead of only the end of the disk.

There is no file format difference between CD and Hard disk images with the sole exception that when writing directly to a CD, the spans Ghost writes are missing the normal file signature at the start of a hard disk span - and there's a single bit in the initial .GHO that says it did that instead of writing the normal hard-disk span format. That is the sole file-format difference between the two, and all that the CD bit does is turn off a check for that leading header, nothing else. Ghost is otherwise completely happy to restore whatever content it is given.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print