ddrescue and dd_rescue

[Andreas Thienemann]

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005, Steven Pritchard wrote:

> > I'll just testdrive both packages and we'll see which one is better.
> The problem is they both have their good points.
I start to agree.

I looked at both packages yesterday, and they both have their strong 
points.
And they are quite different.

ddrescue has much better documentation (although the dd_rescue package I 
prepared has the third party manpage).
dd_rescue has better reporting of progress and is a bit more flexible as 
it accepts a bit more command line arguments which control it's 
operations. During my testcase it also seemed a bit faster.

ddrescue however is way more comfortable when errors are encountered as it 
already has the ability to skip the errors and inch closer to the defect 
from both ends of the drive. This is only achievable with dd_rescue when 
using dd_rhelp.

> Personally, I'm starting to think that having both ddrescue and
> dd_rescue, as well as dd_rhelp (a front-end to dd_rescue that I happen
> to have a package for) would be good.
Personally, I do not care anymore, just like Warren. ;)

I'm happy to package both and also maintain the ddrescue and the dd_rescue 
package as well.
If you'd send me your dd_rhelp package, I'll do that as well.

Only question: what's the policy of fedora-extra with regard to similar 
packages? Opinions?

bye,
 andreas