# WinMFS questions



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

I've been using the Linux based MFS Tools CD's in the past with good results. I just backed up my S3 TiVo using WinMFS and so far, it seems much more convenient. I don't have a spare disk to try out the restore function so I was just wondering if people have found WinMFS as reliable as the Linux versions. Also, can WinMFS use a backup made from an expanded disk to restore and expand to a new disk with even bigger capacity? Conversely, can it use a backup made from an expanded disk to restore to an original size disk?

Thanks,

- Craig


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

There's a support forum for MFSLive at http://mfslive.org/forums/. I'm not trying to put you off but you're always better off asking specific questions about a product in the developer's own support forum.

I've used WinMFS for backing up and restoring images on my S3 drives and it seems to work well. IIRC, the format it uses for creating backup images is not the same as the older MFSTools. As such, you may not be able to use it for restoring images that were made using the older tools. I recently tried to restore an image created from an S2 DTivo and WinMFS didn't like it at all. I had to resort to the older command line method using my dedicated Tivo hacking PC.

I believe you can use a backup image taken from an expanded disk as long as the new disk is the same size or larger than the disk the image was taken from. I don't believe you can restore an image from a larger drive to a smaller one, regardless of which version of MFSTools/WinMFS you use.


----------



## rbtravis (Aug 9, 2005)

winMFS problems, causes Green Screen of Death, Spike2k5 is lying low and only answering selected questions. Redid the same disk with Instantcake from www.DVRupgrade.com and everything worked fine. Tested the drive with the extreme test of Hard Disk Sentinel Professional, the disk passed with flying colors. Spike's software has problems with backup and restore sizes. If you back something up and try to restore it to the same disk it tells you the target drive is too small. It cannot even restore to the same drive that was backed up. :down:


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

Thanks for the responses so far. Sorry to see the above about WinMFS. It sure is convenient, but if it's not all that reliable, sounds like I should stick with the Linux based tools.

I don't know about dual disk systems, but for for single disk systems, I believe MFS Tools (Linux) can restore to an original disk from an expanded backup. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that it only backs up the operating system partitions. That way, any backup can restore to a disk as large or larger than the original.


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

CraigHB said:


> Thanks for the responses so far. Sorry to see the above about WinMFS. It sure is convenient, but if it's not all that reliable, sounds like I should stick with the Linux based tools.


When it works, it works. When it doesn't, it doesn't. There isn't an in between.

Most of the time it works, and it covers the majority of usage patterns.


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

That's the thing, Linux MFS tools disks always work properly (assuming the PC hardware is supported). If that's not the case for WinMFS then I don't feel all that comfortable in using it. That's too bad because it's super convenient.


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

CraigHB said:


> That's the thing, Linux MFS tools disks always work properly (assuming the PC hardware is supported). If that's not the case for WinMFS then I don't feel all that comfortable in using it. That's too bad because it's super convenient.


I argue that the linux tools DO NOT always work. In fact these days they have created many 'bad' installs by creating partitions which are affected by the kernel bug!


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

I'm not familiar with that bug. What is it?


----------



## halfempty (Oct 17, 2008)

CraigHB said:


> I'm not familiar with that bug. What is it?


If it's the same one I've run across it sometimes happens when you expand to a >320GB and use the partition optimization switch (-p I think). It puts the OS partitions in the middle of the drive and the mfs partitions on either side. Depending on how large your original mfs partitions were this sometimes leaves the kernel partition beyond the 137GB boundary. The prom code doesn't see past 137GB, so it can't find the kernel.


----------



## JamieP (Aug 3, 2004)

halfempty said:


> If it's the same one I've run across it sometimes happens when you expand to a >320GB and use the partition optimization switch (-p I think). It puts the OS partitions in the middle of the drive and the mfs partitions on either side. Depending on how large your original mfs partitions were this sometimes leaves the kernel partition beyond the 137GB boundary. The prom code doesn't see past 137GB, so it can't find the kernel.


I'm pretty sure this issue doesn't apply to recent tivos (S3, THD, DT, etc), which I believe all have proms that are lba48 aware.

Ciper may be referring to issues that arise with drives > 1TiB. mfstools will create partitions > 1TiB, which the tivo kernel cannot currently handle. winmfs (since 9.1) has a check for this and will not create those big partitions unless specifically instructed to.


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

JamieP is right. Aftermarket kernels exist which have the bugfix to allow the full partition size but TiVo doesn't seem to be interested in making the minor change 



JamieP said:


> I'm pretty sure this issue doesn't apply to recent tivos (S3, THD, DT, etc), which I believe all have proms that are lba48 aware.


I think you meant kernel and not prom


----------



## halfempty (Oct 17, 2008)

JamieP said:


> I'm pretty sure this issue doesn't apply to recent tivos (S3, THD, DT, etc), which I believe all have proms that are lba48 aware.


Shows you how old my stuff is.


----------



## JamieP (Aug 3, 2004)

ciper said:


> I think you meant kernel and not prom


No. I meant the PROM. The issue that halfempty brought up is a PROM issue, not a kernel issue. It only applies to older PROMs that are not lba48 aware.


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

JamieP said:


> No. I meant the PROM. The issue that halfempty brought up is a PROM issue, not a kernel issue. It only applies to older PROMs that are not lba48 aware.


You are right. I wasn't reading properly.

Although not directly aware of the issue previously I reread his reply and fully understand the reason behind it. (I learned something new today)


----------

