On 11/10, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote: > I have added a warning to the manual stating how important the logfile > is. Forcing its use seems a little radical to me.
Throwing an error saying, for example "You didn't specify a logfile. You probably wanted to. Use the -f flag to proceed without a log file." ...is radical? I think it's far less problematic than the number of people who regret not using a logfile two days later. Somebody back me up here :) > 5 MB/s is not a bad sustained speed for a copy from a failing drive. > Yesterday for example, an user reported a speed of about 1 MB/s > > The -c option can't increase the speed beyond certain limit. In fact you > are using a very big value that forces ddrescue to allocate a 52 MiB buffer. Okay, thanks. Yes, I was checking the size of ddrescue in ram to see the size of the buffer. Crashed my computer with larger values a couple times. The units confused me. > >It would also be nice if ddrescue started where it left off in the absence > >of a logfile. > > It would be nice, but how can it be done reliably? I was thinking just check the size of the output file and continue at its end? -- "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H. L. Mencken http://www.ChaosReigns.com http://www.isitchristmas.com/ _______________________________________________ Bug-ddrescue mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-ddrescue
