Has anyone used this? Any drawbacks?
I currently find Acronis True Image in Windows doing my full backup and I've restored Linux and the boot/efi several times with no side effects. Just wondering how good is Clonezilla for single partitions or even single files.
It's like scripting.
It relies on time-tested executables for services.
It uses "partclone" or "ntfsclone", that sort of thing.
You would check its dependencies, to see "what company it keeps".
But like a number of disk management or backup/restore
softwares, it doesn't do boot repair necessarily. If
does not do disambiguation, so a 128GB SSD boots independent
of a 256GB SSD. This is "left as an exercise for the administrator".
if it's GUIDs, UUIDs, BLKID, PartType, PartIDentifier, these
are left to the administrator.
To some extent, a Boot Repair CD could be used to tidy up something
done with other tools. While you are fixing the boot, you want only
a single drive to be inside the PC, and then only the OSes on that
disk, will be detected by OSProber. Occasionally, Boot Repair screws up,
so don't feed it any "complicated" cases.
Ultimately, it is the Administrators job to "make sure all the numbers
line up". There is no free lunch where disks are involved.
Could developers make this better ? Yes. "Needs the right skill set".
There would be plenty of people to screw it up. Ask the developer of
Boot Repair, if they would have worked on that a second time.
When it comes to "adding GUIs to stuff", there have been lots of cases
where the GUI design added no value at all to the exercise. It needs
thoughtful work, and it needs that "right skill set" person for the
logic bits that Clonezilla doesn't have.
If you'd asked me to do it (as an example of the wrong person),
I would have used Athena widgets, because I couldn't be arsed to find
anything better at the time. Yes, it looked dreadful.
Paul