tony tong Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 hi, I am following this guide http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.ph...le_And_Accurate and performing the "dd" I am copying the file from a NTFS partition to a ext3 partition. But it has last for an hour and it is still dd'ing. How long does the dd take? I wonder if I have done something wrong. And Does Mac OS x86 work on NTFS? ext3? fat32? partition. Regards. Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLS Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Bloody ages. I dd'ed straight from the still archived file, on a 7200RPM laptop HD, it took more than two hours, maybe 3. Remember that dd will give you absolutely no feedback while it works. It's perfectly normal. You know it's finished when you get your prompt back, the HD LED stops blinking, and if you use a laptop, the fan calms down And to answer the second question, nope, OS X can only be installed on its own kind of partition, HFS+, since it uses a very specific filesystem (for things like data/resource forks, metadata). It can read data on NTFS partitions and can read and write data on FAT 32 partitions, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJägermeister Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 hi,How long does the dd take? Tony 8338s (2H 20min) with a HPnc6000 write on a HD 2,5' 30GB 4200rpm and read from a USB-HD 2,5' 40GB 4200rpm. dd method done with a linux 50 MB Linux live-CD: http://www.inside-security.de/insert.html Enough time to drink some beer during this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agathorn Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 omg when I did my setup, dd only took about 8 minutes under Kubuntu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchBomcanhao Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 mine took around 15 minutes... and you can check progress with special flag (--progress or something like that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacL0ver Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 yep, you can get pretty fast results if you use bs=32256 skip=1 if=(image location) of=(copy location) --progress. And then wait for it to say 6,441,910,272. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miaplacidus Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 I am copying the file from a NTFS partition to a ext3 partition.But it has last for an hour and it is still dd'ing. That does sound slow. dd moves contents in blocks; try using a larger block size (bs option in dd) for speedup. Also, if you are piping from tar to dd in a single command (tar.... | dd....) it's the decompression of the archive that takes long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLS Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 MitchBomcanhao > I think this flag may be Windows only. Or at least, it didn't work and wasn't in the dd manpage in the knoppix CD I had laying around when I did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchBomcanhao Posted October 8, 2005 Share Posted October 8, 2005 yeah i used dd for windows... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony tong Posted October 8, 2005 Author Share Posted October 8, 2005 This is the truth. window version of dd support --progress and works fastly linux version of dd do not support --progress and works slowly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnomes Posted October 10, 2005 Share Posted October 10, 2005 under windows the decompression took about 10 minutes and dd took 45 minutes 7200rpm western digital with semp3000 64 oc'd to 3300. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts