[submix8c]

FlippX, on 09 May 2012 - 10:30 AM, said:

could someone please tell me a reliable os-backup-software that works with win98se ?!?!
I got 2 hdds over here, but I guess just copying the win-dir over as a backup won't work...
Thanks again.

re: Backup How-To...

[tomasz86]

Clonezilla is good for backing up whole partitions or drives. You run it as LiveCD (or from USB media) and it's pretty simple to use.

[FlippX]

Thanks guys,
I knew there was more than one possibility. (...I never ever used that native backup-function...)
...and I just visited the u98sesp's webpage after posting here, finding that important notice...

Anyways, I like the all-in-one solution, so lets give Clonezilla a try. If its features are (still) true for w98se (..y not, it's a live-cd..), it should be way faster than the dos-copy-backup-approach.. From time to time I did a backup of the system-folder(s), and that took like hours in dos (at least it felt like that..)
On the other hand I wonder why there is nothing written about clonezilla on the u98sesp page?!

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

FlippX, on 10 May 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

On the other hand I wonder why there is nothing written about clonezilla on the u98sesp page?!

Why would it be? People are going to choose whatever suits them best.

[FlippX]

...why not?
I mean to choose whatever suits me best, works best when I know what's there to choose from..
But you don't know of any problem the backup software can produce and out of that reason didn't mention it, right??

Oh and btw.
One problem with new software is that it might install some new incompatible systemfiles, is it a good idea to protect some files from overwriting?? ..Like in "modern" windows..

[submix8c]

???
Aren't you cluttering the Topic with an unrelated subject?

...and now I go O.T. -

There is a myriad of "cloning" techniques and software for such purpose and each have merits and fallacies. It's up to the end user to determine what they're comfortable with. I personally opt for Ghost, but that's a matter of preference., correct? MSFN'ers tend to browse around for suggested software. I believe that Clonezilla is also listed in a topic of "Software that works for Win9x"? Look for it...

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

FlippX, on 10 May 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

...why not?
I mean to choose whatever suits me best, works best when I know what's there to choose from..
But you don't know of any problem the backup software can produce and out of that reason didn't mention it, right??

Oh and btw.
One problem with new software is that it might install some new incompatible systemfiles, is it a good idea to protect some files from overwriting?? ..Like in "modern" windows..

This is NOT a backup topic. START your own topic and quit getting on my nerves

[Fredledingue]

Yes: the 98SESP3 page is not a "how to back up w98" FAQ.
It's only telling you to back up your system, and I added (I'm the author of this "important notice") the most basic way to do it, for poeple who have no time looking around on the internet for the best cloning solution still compatible with w9x.
I wrote about that just so that poeple can't complain afterward that we let them in the blue about vague mention of back ups without giving a clue about how to do it.

TBS, having a copy on a second HDD is a pretty safe way to back up w98. On a CD-R too.
Partition cloning is only better. Yet I doubt it's faster. Maybe it's faster to copy under 32bit mode than DOS. That's the only difference I can see for a task which consists basicaly in copying nearly one Giga of datas.

The other difference is that you can't have a functioning OS by just copy-pasting system files on a blank HDD. While you can have it by cloning.

HTH

[DougB]

Fredledingue, on 10 May 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

I added (I'm the author of this "important notice") the most basic way to do it, for poeple who have no time looking around on the internet for the best cloning solution still compatible with w9x.
I wrote about that just so that poeple can't complain afterward that we let them in the blue about vague mention of back ups without giving a clue about how to do it.

Regarding the current backup issue, i appreciate your work on documenting/pre-troubleshooting uSP installation on your web page.

However, i have misgivings about one line:

"Restoring windows 98 can be done simply be recopying all the system files back to their original location, in dos mode."

The DOS internal COPY command should *not* be used for this! Some of the Windows system files or folders (perhaps installed by non-Ms programs) might have long names. Copying with the DOS COPY command will rename the copies to short names. This could make the restored system (at least partly) non-functional.

I have successfully backed up Windows many times in pure DOS (*not* in a DOS window) using either of two free methods... neither of which is what i would call "simple":

1) Using Odi's DOS Tools For Long Filenames, which contains the LCOPY.EXE and LDEL.EXE programs. (You don't need a LFN driver with this method, and the case of switches is not important.)

To store, go to the target directory and do:

  lcopy /a /s c:\windows\*

"/A" includes files with system and/or hidden attributes also, "/S" recurses through subdirectories, and "*" makes sure every file from the source is copied, whether they have an extension or not. Make sure the target directory is empty before you do the copy.

To restore, go to C:\Windows\ and use:

  ldel /a /s /f c:*

"/F" deletes folders too. Then do:

  lcopy /a /s d:\path\*

where "d:\path\" is the drive and path to your backup.

2) Alternatively, first run a memory-resident LFN driver (Jason Hood's DOSLFN is an up-to-date driver), and then use a LFN-aware archiver/unarchiver. I've found that PKZip crashes with large numbers of files/directories, so the Info-Zip 32-bit archiver is my choice.

To store, start by installing the LFN driver. Then go to the target directory and do (the case of switches *is* important):

  zip32 /r /S -9 zipfile c:\windows\*

"/r" recurses through subdirectories, "/S" includes files with system and/or hidden attributes, "-9" gives maximum compression (but is slower), "zipfile" is substituted with the name you want to give the created zip file, and "*" makes sure all files from the source are included, whether they have an extension or not. Make sure to choose a non-existant "zipfile" name.

To restore, first make sure a LFN driver is installed. Then go to C:\Windows and delete all folders and files however you want to (LDEL.EXE as mentioned above is good, but there are other methods -- just make sure all files in and under C:\Windows\ are gone). Then do:

  unzip32 d:\path\zipfile

where "zipfile" is substituted with the name of the archive file you want to restore, and "d:\path\: is where you stored it.

These are the simpl*est*, free methods i can think of. The advantage of method 1 is that it is simpl*er* and quicker, but the backup is uncompressed and takes up more disk space. Method 2 is more complex and slower, but the backup files require less room.

And yes... perhaps these posts could be moved to a different thread?

- Doug B.

[JorgeA]

DougB,

Wow, that was a fantastic, detailed how-to! It does belong in its own thread. I would even suggest making it "sticky" so that it doesn't get buried over time.

--JorgeA