From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8B41381F3 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:35:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B57AD21C00D; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:34:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wp065.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp065.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.132.72]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA2FD21C094 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:33:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from g224060009.adsl.alicedsl.de ([92.224.60.9] helo=[192.168.25.10]); authenticated by wp065.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) id 1TWWuk-0003pa-9Z; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 19:33:18 +0100 Message-ID: <509BFAED.2060002@ccube.de> Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 19:33:17 +0100 From: mindrunner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121028 Thunderbird/16.0.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Hard drive change References: <509BCE5C.3030804@ccube.de> <20121108153733.6e7a9d02@digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20121108153733.6e7a9d02@digimed.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;kernel@ccube.de;1352399599;7b2f5149; X-Archives-Salt: 3f4de24d-1825-47a8-86b3-017d85334a4b X-Archives-Hash: 2018ed00569abae5a506e26f0c69a7f9 I never payed attention to this. all i know is that the alignment is correct. (checked with parted) On 11/08/2012 04:37 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 16:23:08 +0100, mindrunner wrote: > >> i always use ddrescue for migrating to another hdd. >> it is much more comfortable than dd and does not depent on file >> systems, etc. >> I always prefer copying on block device level. > > Even when the two devices have different block sizes? > > At best you'd get crap performance from misaligned filesystem boundaries. > >