You can go with the rsync solution if you create your new filesystems with the old uuids. On 19 Mar 2018 3:30 pm, "Jens John" <lists@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, at 14:46, Carsten Mattner via arch-general wrote: > > On 3/19/18, Paul Gideon Dann via arch-general > > <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I've moved or cloned my general-use Arch system between disks more > times > > > than I can count. This is what LVM is for. If you're not using LVM (or > > > BTRFS), I recommend you start > > > > Which aspect is easier/improved with LVM? > > Generally speaking, it decouples the sizes of your file systems from disk > geometry (partitions). So you can resize whichever logical volume up or > down without having to care about if there's space in front or after it. > > What 's not so neat about OPs dd solution when compared to rsync is that > if you have a 100G file system 50% full , you'll copy ~100G of data instead > of ~50G. Depending on transfer speeds, that can be a lot of extra time. > Also, you'll get free defragmentation when starting with fresh file > systems. If you want to change file system block sizes, you also need to > start fresh. >
