How can I make a backup of multiversion?

[mikelin]

I made a multiversion boot by FMCB1.5. I checked the memory. It took around 2m mc space. but when I used ule to make its backup, it took more than 31m of usb drive space:(

I donnt think this backup can be used again. Is there any possible way to make a usable backup of multiversion FMCB1.5?

[ffgriever]

The easiest way would be to do full MC image... and then restore it if needed.

PS. This backup you made will be usable... but will take a whole lot of space on your MC (if it is big enough to let you write this much data).

[mikelin]

The easiest way would be to do full MC image... and then restore it if needed.

PS. This backup you made will be usable... but will take a whole lot of space on your MC (if it is big enough to let you write this much data).


My MC is only 8m, thats why I mean its not usable:D

Errr....by which can I make the MC image? I never know there is such an application......:crazy:

[suloku]

Make a backup of a normal setup with the installer elf file at the mc, which allows you to set up the cross linking.

I dunno if that will make it for you as I doens't know what is your goal.

[remax]

The easiest way would be to do full MC image... and then restore it if needed.

PS. This backup you made will be usable... but will take a whole lot of space on your MC (if it is big enough to let you write this much data).

do you think it'll work? Won't there be problems with the FAT hack?

[dlanor]

I made a multiversion boot by FMCB1.5. I checked the memory. It took around 2m mc space. but when I used ule to make its backup, it took more than 31m of usb drive space:(
The increased size usage is because a file-by-file backup will consume space for each file copied, though the installation on MC only contains a single copy of the physical content of the file, with each filename in the B?EXEC-SYSTEM directory (except icon.sys and McBoot.icn) being linked to that same block of data in the FAT of the MC.

The size consumed both before and after your backup indicates that you are using the big file internal to a fat PS2 to make the install. You could reduce that size significantly by instead using the 75KB DVDPLx file relevant to your region. This is done simply by renaming that file to "DVDELF.BIN" and copying it into the same folder as the FMCB installer before using it. This is what I did myself, using the DVDPLE file which is valid for the european region. That consumes much less space on the MC (appx 100 KB including the icon stuff), and the total size of a file-by-file backup will be appx 1.6 MB.

Such a backup will work if restored on MC, but you should be aware that the restored MC setup will not be identical to the one you had before backup, even though it will look the same. But the restored backup will be consuming all those 1.6 MB of MC space, whereas the original install only consumed appx 100KB.

Like ffgriever said, only a full MC image backup can preserve the FAT linking for future restoration in unaltered state. And like suloku said, in many cases it is easier just to reinstall the stuff once again, handling the backup of other MC folders separately of course.

I haven't had the need yet, but what I'd do is to backup all MC folders except B?EXEC-SYSTEM using normal uLE FileBrowser commands, and for restoration I'd start by reinstalling FMCB completely, with formatting of the MC, and then use uLE to restore all the normal folders backed up earlier.

And for gamesave folders (as opposed to homebrew stuff) I recommend using 'psuPaste' for the backups, to ensure that all games accept the restored gamesaves as valid.

Best regards: dlanor

[dlanor]

do you think it'll work?
Yes, it will.

Won't there be problems with the FAT hack?
No. Making a file-by-file backup/format/restore will simply eliminate the FAT hack, which was never necessary for proper booting of the FMCB installed file. It's just a way of saving space by avoiding the physical storage of the same file data 22 times over (in current version).

Best regards: dlanor

[remax]

Yes, it will.

No. Making a file-by-file backup/format/restore will simply eliminate the FAT hack, which was never necessary for proper booting of the FMCB installed file. It's just a way of saving space by avoiding the physical storage of the same file data 22 times over (in current version).

Best regards: dlanor

I was talking about a full MC image (by HDProject i guess). I know what is the FAT hack ;)

That's because of this FAT hack that mikelin has a backup of 31Mb (each "virtual/linked" file is copied as a real file when doing traditionnal file by file backup).

A full MC image would only "cost" the size of the MC, but by curiosity, i would like to know if FAT trick will be well backed up by HDproject (i guess yes but would like a confirmation).

EDIt : according to your previous answer i guess the answer is really yes, thank you ;)

[dlanor]

A full MC image would only "cost" the size of the MC, but by curiosity, i would like to know if FAT trick will be well backed up by HDproject (i guess yes but would like a confirmation).

EDIt : according to your previous answer i guess the answer is really yes, thank you ;)In fact I haven't tried that backup method myself, so I'm not 100% sure.

It should work if the entire image is copied sector-by-sector, as I think it is in making a vmc file, but I'm not really sure of that. Personally I don't want to use such a method anyway, so it's not something I'll dig any deeper into at this time.

Best regards: dlanor

[mikelin]

Best regards: dlanor

yes man!!!! this does really make sense. I donno the micro dvdelf could aslo work for multiversion.

and It does work. the backup of multiversion is done, around 1.6m. its true that its not that useful normally. but in some certain situation, it can be very useful. I think its better to keep one backup:)

[remax]

yes man!!!! this does really make sense. I donno the micro dvdelf could aslo work for multiversion.

and It does work. the backup of multiversion is done, around 1.6m. its true that its not that useful normally. but in some certain situation, it can be very useful. I think its better to keep one backup:)

don't know why as if FMCB is screwed you can't access to your backup, but well, it's your free space :D

I think it would be more logical to keep the installer somewhere. The must have is a second MC with a rescue FMCB

(OT : Does someone know which version of uLE has the greatest ratio size/abilities?).

[dlanor]

(OT : Does someone know which version of uLE has the greatest ratio size/abilities?).
In order to get any major size shrinkage for uLE you'd have to go back to really ancient versions, which means that many of the features we take for granted today would be missing. I understand that you want to free up as much of the MC as possible, but I really don't think that's a good way to do it. If you really don't have room for the current uLE version on your MC, then I suggest that you boot it from mass: instead, since that too is supported by FMCB.

Best regards: dlanor

[TnA]

I believe, he means "which uLE has the most features".
So the answer is a "uLE 4.12Beta-Version + HDL = uLE PLUS" or newest, I think.

[dlanor]

I believe, he means "which uLE has the most features".
I don't think so, since he specifically asked for a ratio relative to size.

So the answer is a "uLE 4.12Beta-Version + HDL = uLE PLUS" or newest, I think.
Do you really trust hackchip that much ?

In any case, I still maintain that it's a very bad idea to embed a program like HDL into uLE, for several reasons. One of those is that HDL is just dead weight for every console lacking any HDD. And remember that this includes ALL recent PStwo models.

And even for those who do have an HDD, there is nothing to be gained by storing the HDL elf inside the uLE elf. It still requires a separate launch procedure, even though that is partly hidden from the user. And the major launch delay (HDL driver inits) will not be in any way reduced by loading the HDL file from uLE instead of using an external ELF file.

Best regards: dlanor

[mikelin]

I don't think so, since he specifically asked for a ratio relative to size.

Do you really trust hackchip that much ?

In any case, I still maintain that it's a very bad idea to embed a program like HDL into uLE, for several reasons. One of those is that HDL is just dead weight for every console lacking any HDD. And remember that this includes ALL recent PStwo models.

And even for those who do have an HDD, there is nothing to be gained by storing the HDL elf inside the uLE elf. It still requires a separate launch procedure, even though that is partly hidden from the user. And the major launch delay (HDL driver inits) will not be in any way reduced by loading the HDL file from uLE instead of using an external ELF file.

Best regards: dlanor



Totally agree with u. embeding HDL into ULE doesnt make any reasonable sense. it even freezes the possibility to update HDL......

[remax]

In order to get any major size shrinkage for uLE you'd have to go back to really ancient versions, which means that many of the features we take for granted today would be missing. I understand that you want to free up as much of the MC as possible, but I really don't think that's a good way to do it. If you really don't have room for the current uLE version on your MC, then I suggest that you boot it from mass: instead, since that too is supported by FMCB.

Best regards: dlanor

ok that' a good point ;)

I don't think so, since he specifically asked for a ratio relative to size.


Exactly! Thanks ;)

Do you really trust hackchip that much ?

In any case, I still maintain that it's a very bad idea to embed a program like HDL into uLE, for several reasons. One of those is that HDL is just dead weight for every console lacking any HDD. And remember that this includes ALL recent PStwo models.

And even for those who do have an HDD, there is nothing to be gained by storing the HDL elf inside the uLE elf. It still requires a separate launch procedure, even though that is partly hidden from the user. And the major launch delay (HDL driver inits) will not be in any way reduced by loading the HDL file from uLE instead of using an external ELF file.

Best regards: dlanor

Being part of metagames i know uLE PLus! but I don't the the point myself too. I keep using the regular uLE.

[TnA]

I don't think so, since he specifically asked for a ratio relative to size.


Hm,... I thought so, because he asked also for "abilities".


Do you really trust hackchip that much ?


Don't know much about him. Only, that he cracked a few apps (and set his own name to it),...


In any case, I still maintain that it's a very bad idea to embed a program like HDL into uLE, for several reasons. One of those is that HDL is just dead weight for every console lacking any HDD. And remember that this includes ALL recent PStwo models.


...of course. I only use "official" ( eeerm,... ^.^6 ) uLE.
uLE+ was only for testing.
Nothing new, only an embedded HDL, SwapMagic (in this case, illegal in most countries, because of embedded commercial software afaik),...


And even for those who do have an HDD, there is nothing to be gained by storing the HDL elf inside the uLE elf. It still requires a separate launch procedure, even though that is partly hidden from the user. And the major launch delay (HDL driver inits) will not be in any way reduced by loading the HDL file from uLE instead of using an external ELF file.

Best regards: dlanor

Yes, it brings nothing,... ^^
(not even a higher compatibility. ONLY one big ELF and users are forced to use embedded ELFs, or use external files, but bloating space again.)

I only mentioned it, because of the "abilities". ;)

regards TnA

[remax]

Hm,... I thought so, because he asked also for "abilities".


To clear up things : i was asking about which version of uLE has the lowest size without loosing too much of its standard abilities. It's to go on my rescue MC for when i screw FMCB on my main MC.

But dlanor has well answered, to really gain something more than a few kb, i would have to use a really old version, loosing a lot of fonctionnalities.

Well, in fact perhaps a very old version, even like LE (not uLE) whould do the trick as i really only need something that allows me to launch the FMCB installer and to manage files on various medias.
So it as to support my USB key, access to mc1, and if possible access to HDD.
I didn't tried yet.

[TnA]

Maybe you would like to compile uLe yourself, with ripped off features. ;)

[remax]

Maybe you would like to compile uLe yourself, with ripped off features. ;)

Yeah, that would be a solution. I'm not a great coder but i think i know enough about coding to just modify (to rip off feature) a source code.
Perhaps i'll try that, could be educative also :)