The Joel on Software Discussion Group

I've been reading JOS archives on backup software, which has been good.  However, I'm interested in something slightly different.  I've got this 120GB drive which is going to be used as an intermediate step in a notebook hard drive upgrade (and then will either stay in the USB enclosure or stuck in a Linux fileserver).  Will the backup/restore process be easier if I format it as NTFS or FAT32?  If I use Ghost for Unix, (g4u), I understand it won't handle ntfs writing too well, which I've seen in the past with Unixes.

On the other hand, some NTFS data might get lost if I copy to FAT32 as an intermediate step.  In addition, NTFS is apparently not recommended for USB drives because of risk of data corruption as NTFS is more sensitive to just yanking the drive out, which is of course more common with USB drives.


Are people using the same products for backup as they are for disk upgrades?

"In addition, NTFS is apparently not recommended for USB drives because of risk of data corruption as NTFS is more sensitive to just yanking the drive out, which is of course more common with USB drives."

Actually it's not any more sensitive than FAT but the FAT driver in Windows XP forces all writes to removal disks all the time -- allowing it to be yanked.  The NTFS driver does not.  NTFS is actually less sensitve to data corruption in general.

If interopt between non-NT/XP system is necessary then you should format it FAT.  Otherwise, you should format it NTFS.

From http://tinyurl.com/3uozy [microsoft.com]:

FAT32 handles volumes from 512 MB to 2 TB.

However, in Windows XP, you can format a FAT32 volume up to 32 GB only.

For work, NTFS is better but as an intermediate step, FAT32 is safe and fine, especially if you want to use g4u.

Why not both?  I've formatted a 250G USB/Firewire drive into two partitions -- small FAT32 for apps like Ghost that cant read/write NTFS very well, and a larger NTFS partition. 

- FAT32 file size is limited to 2GB, which is not enough for video;
- NTFS allows you to compress individual files/folders.

"Actually it's not any more sensitive than FAT but the FAT driver in Windows XP forces all writes to removal disks all the time -- allowing it to be yanked.  The NTFS driver does not.  NTFS is actually less sensitve to data corruption in general."

Yeah.  That.  I couldn't articulate it.

The big thing I was worried about for NTFS->FAT32 was the loss of NTFS info like creator, permissions, etc.  It would seem like this would be an issue.

It's an issue if that information is important to you.  If not, then it's not much of an issue.  Chances are, you aren't in a multiuser environment have permissions to deal with.

better use fat32 if you EVER want to write to it from linux

If you haven't bought it think again as to why you need it.

If you're upgrading the Hard Drive on the laptop then get your new 2.5" laptop HD and a USB external case (should cost around $15).

You should be able to clone the old HD on to the new HD without too much hassle, and then you keep the old laptop HD as an external USB HD.

If you are going to get the 120Gb HD the answer as has been said is to make two or more partitions. Make an NTFS partition for all you data, so you don't lose any of the permissions, and clone the system and program drive to a FAT32 partition so you can easily access it using Ghost.

I like BillT's recommendation.  You have a partition for OSes that can't read NTFS, plus a larger one for the majority of your files.

Or, you could use a USB Keydrive (they are almost always FAT/FAT32) for transferring between disparate OSes.

My external drive is all NTFS, but I don't move it around alot -- into the office on Monday, listen to music all week, take it home on Friday.  I just have to remember to always use the "Remove Hardware" icon in the clock tray to avoid corruption.

The NTFS reading and writing under Linux has made dramatic gains with the newer 2.6 kernels. You may want to investigate this option more closely as it may fulfill your needs. At the very least, reading from an NTFS partition is no problem with Linux. Writing has always been where the problems come up. At one point in time, the Linux code for NTFS simply marked the partition dirty as it couldn't handle all of the requirements of updating the journal. This is no longer the case but some testing may be in order to confirm everything works as expected before you jump off the diving board.

If the desire is to transfer the data from Windows machine to a Linux machine, do you need to use a USB drive? If you can get a network connection from the Linux box to the Windows box, the Samba tools can be used to read the files straight off the Windows machine if you do a file share. (If you're connected by broadband to the Internet with a firewall, this is not usually a good idea.)