🚀 go-pugleaf

Paul J. Campbell wrote:

> I have a home network consisting of two computers connected to a
> small router via 10/100 Mbps ethernet. I have 4 IDE hard disks, each
> 200GB or less. The operating systems are Windows XP SP1 and SP2,
> Windows 98, Linux Red Hat 9, and Linux Fedora Core 3.
> 
> Now for the hard bit - what's the easiest way to keep all of these
> IDE hard drives backed up, e.g. if one of my hard drives gets errors and
> fails, I'd preferably like to just replace it with a backed-up
> hard drive and have it work.

Cheap way to do it--back each machine up to the other.

> I believe I would want one or more backup 'devices' to be connected
> to my router, i.e. I don't think I want to keep opening up my
> computers and keep putting in individual backup hard drives every
> time I want to do a backup.

You don't have to open your machines--put your drives in removable caddies.

> The question is, what should those 
> 'devices' be?
> 
> I'm a complete novice in backing up, so don't assume that I know
> anything. By all means include any brand names in your answer.
> 
> Corporations don't have a lot of time to waste, so how do they do it?

Tape.  Big honking arrays of high end tape drives.

> I don't necessarily mind spending some money if it will give me
> reliability and convenience.
> 
> Would hardware RAID 1 or RAID 5 work?

This isn't backup, this is reliability.

> - Backing up: can the backed-up drive(s) sit on the network
>      outside my computer? The original hard drive is obviously
>      inside my computer.

While this can be arranged it takes some doing and it's not going to be
cheap or simple.  You're basically looking at something like iSCSI.

> - Restoring: if one of the hard drives
>      in my computers fails, can I replace it with a backed-up hard drive
>      and have it work?

In general, if one drive is local and the other network attached, no.

>      Will both Linux and Windows still work? 

That depends--if the RAID is working at the hardware level, yes, if it's
working at the software level, probably not.  One or the other, yes, both
on the same drive, not likely.
 
> I understand that RAID is rather expensive but it may be worth it
> depending on the price.

Not all that expensive.  But it's still not backup.

> --
> If that's possible, then I think this still leaves to have to deal with
> one more backup methodology - if some files get deleted accidently, then
> in the back-ups they will be deleted as well.
> 
> So I probably need something which also allows me to do a few
> historical backups. I suppose I need something which can image my hard
> drives, and (to save on cost) with the option to allow incremental
> backups on subsequent backups?
> 
> I tried using Norton Ghost 9 in XP SP1 (whilst XP was running - apparently
> it's supposed to support this). I did it the hard way by opening
> up my computer and connecting the backup drive to it. (As I wrote above,
>    I'd prefer if I could have the backup drive on the network all the
>    time, if possible).
> 
> But it didn't work for me. Some logical drive letters seemed to back up
> fine, others didn't. So I have a portion of the files backed up,
> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.
> On the web this Windows XP problem is mentioned by many people, but
> I could never find a solution.

It's not clear what you did here.

> --
> On the web I've researched a few backup devices. Something like
> Netgear Storage Central (SC101) sounds good in that it allows you
> to put in your own hard drives of your choice.
> 
> Buffalo TeraStation comes with an attractive 1TB of storage via
> 4x250GB hard drives, but I don't believe the hard drives can be taken out?
> 
> In any case if my understanding is correct, both of these devices
> basically allow you to backup files. By themselves, I think they don't
> come with anything to allow me to take full images of my hard disks - is
> that correct?

That is correct.

-- 
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

> I have a home network consisting of two computers connected to a
> small router via 10/100 Mbps ethernet. I have 4 IDE hard disks, each
> 200GB or less. The operating systems are Windows XP SP1 and SP2,
> Windows 98, Linux Red Hat 9, and Linux Fedora Core 3.

So that are multiple OS per computer and various file systems too.

> Now for the hard bit - what's the easiest way to keep all of these
> IDE hard drives backed up, e.g. if one of my hard drives gets errors and
> fails, I'd preferably like to just replace it with a backed-up
> hard drive and have it work.

There is nothing like that.
Usually you have to replace failed disk with a new one, THEN restore data on
it.

> I believe I would want one or more backup 'devices' to be connected
> to my router, i.e. I don't think I want to keep opening up my
> computers and keep putting in individual backup hard drives every
> time I want to do a backup. The question is, what should those
> 'devices' be?

Any form of disk storage. I do it through a Windows server with additional
HDs.

> I'm a complete novice in backing up, so don't assume that I know
> anything. By all means include any brand names in your answer.
>
> Corporations don't have a lot of time to waste, so how do they do it?
> I don't necessarily mind spending some money if it will give me
> reliability and convenience.

They usually do not backup user workstations.
For other data they have servers.

> Would hardware RAID 1 or RAID 5 work?
> - Backing up: can the backed-up drive(s) sit on the network
>      outside my computer? The original hard drive is obviously
>      inside my computer.

RAID over network? Not in consumer market.

> - Restoring: if one of the hard drives
>      in my computers fails, can I replace it with a backed-up hard drive
>      and have it work? Will both Linux and Windows still work?

There is nothing like that yet.

> I understand that RAID is rather expensive but it may be worth it
> depending on the price.

RAID over network? You budget is too small.

> If that's possible, then I think this still leaves to have to deal with
> one more backup methodology - if some files get deleted accidently, then
> in the back-ups they will be deleted as well.

You can generate multiple images on schedule basis.

> So I probably need something which also allows me to do a few
> historical backups. I suppose I need something which can image my hard
> drives, and (to save on cost) with the option to allow incremental
> backups on subsequent backups?

Incremental? Not possible/reliable yet with multiple OSes/FS on one disk
More difficult to restore.

> I tried using Norton Ghost 9 in XP SP1 (whilst XP was running - apparently
> it's supposed to support this). I did it the hard way by opening
> up my computer and connecting the backup drive to it. (As I wrote above,
>    I'd prefer if I could have the backup drive on the network all the
time,
>    if possible).

Could use USB external drive. Saves from opening computer case.

> But it didn't work for me. Some logical drive letters seemed to back up
> fine, others didn't. So I have a portion of the files backed up,
> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.
> On the web this Windows XP problem is mentioned by many people, but
> I could never find a solution.

Ghost 9 is a crap anyways.

> On the web I've researched a few backup devices. Something like
> Netgear Storage Central (SC101) sounds good in that it allows you
> to put in your own hard drives of your choice.
>
> Buffalo TeraStation comes with an attractive 1TB of storage via
> 4x250GB hard drives, but I don't believe the hard drives can be taken out?

O course they can be taken out. But why?

> In any case if my understanding is correct, both of these devices
> basically allow you to backup files. By themselves, I think they don't
> come with anything to allow me to take full images of my hard disks - is
> that correct?

That function is in your imaging software which runs on a CLIENT system, not
storage device.
I boot my client systems with a custom CD, which does a full client PC
disk(s) image(s) to a server storage. Unattended image completion and
shutdown. Another version of it can restart client system after imaging.

> That function is in your imaging software which runs on a CLIENT system, not
> storage device.
> I boot my client systems with a custom CD, which does a full client PC
> disk(s) image(s) to a server storage. Unattended image completion and
> shutdown. Another version of it can restart client system after imaging.

I'm interested in your custom CD.  Please tell me more about it.

Thanks
Doug

> > That function is in your imaging software which runs on a CLIENT system,
not
> > storage device.
> > I boot my client systems with a custom CD, which does a full client PC
> > disk(s) image(s) to a server storage. Unattended image completion and
> > shutdown. Another version of it can restart client system after imaging.
>
> I'm interested in your custom CD.  Please tell me more about it.

Custom CD is based on WinPE. It automakes connection to a server share.
Enumerates local hard drives and launches ghost32 unattended image dump for
each of them. Then, shuts down PC. This version works for ghost supported
filesystems only.

Paul J. Campbell committed to the eternal aether...:

> I have a home network consisting of two computers connected to a
> small router via 10/100 Mbps ethernet. I have 4 IDE hard disks, each
> 200GB or less. The operating systems are Windows XP SP1 and SP2,
> Windows 98, Linux Red Hat 9, and Linux Fedora Core 3.
> 
> Now for the hard bit - what's the easiest way to keep all of these
> IDE hard drives backed up, e.g. if one of my hard drives gets errors and
> fails, I'd preferably like to just replace it with a backed-up
> hard drive and have it work.
> 
> I believe I would want one or more backup 'devices' to be connected
> to my router, i.e. I don't think I want to keep opening up my
> computers and keep putting in individual backup hard drives every
> time I want to do a backup. The question is, what should those
> 'devices' be?
> 
> I'm a complete novice in backing up, so don't assume that I know
> anything. By all means include any brand names in your answer.
> 
> Corporations don't have a lot of time to waste, so how do they do it?
> I don't necessarily mind spending some money if it will give me
> reliability and convenience.
> 
> Would hardware RAID 1 or RAID 5 work?
> - Backing up: can the backed-up drive(s) sit on the network
>      outside my computer? The original hard drive is obviously
>      inside my computer.
> - Restoring: if one of the hard drives
>      in my computers fails, can I replace it with a backed-up hard drive
>      and have it work? Will both Linux and Windows still work?
> 
> I understand that RAID is rather expensive but it may be worth it
> depending on the price.
> 
> --
> If that's possible, then I think this still leaves to have to deal with
> one more backup methodology - if some files get deleted accidently, then
> in the back-ups they will be deleted as well.
> 
> So I probably need something which also allows me to do a few
> historical backups. I suppose I need something which can image my hard
> drives, and (to save on cost) with the option to allow incremental
> backups on subsequent backups?
> 
> I tried using Norton Ghost 9 in XP SP1 (whilst XP was running - apparently
> it's supposed to support this). I did it the hard way by opening
> up my computer and connecting the backup drive to it. (As I wrote above,
>    I'd prefer if I could have the backup drive on the network all the time,
>    if possible).
> 
> But it didn't work for me. Some logical drive letters seemed to back up
> fine, others didn't. So I have a portion of the files backed up,
> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.
> On the web this Windows XP problem is mentioned by many people, but
> I could never find a solution.

The whole thing would be easier if you ran a file server (which could be a
very humble computer with a couple of large HDDs in it). You could store
ALL your files on the server and back it up with tapes or an external hdd.

Peter wrote:
> > > That function is in your imaging software which runs on a CLIENT system,
> not
> > > storage device.
> > > I boot my client systems with a custom CD, which does a full client PC
> > > disk(s) image(s) to a server storage. Unattended image completion and
> > > shutdown. Another version of it can restart client system after imaging.
> >
> > I'm interested in your custom CD.  Please tell me more about it.
>
> Custom CD is based on WinPE. It automakes connection to a server share.
> Enumerates local hard drives and launches ghost32 unattended image dump for
> each of them. Then, shuts down PC. This version works for ghost supported
> filesystems only.


Thanks for the additional information.

Doug

On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 22:48:59 +1100, "Paul J. Campbell"
<paulc8+nospam@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>I have a home network consisting of two computers connected to a
>small router via 10/100 Mbps ethernet. I have 4 IDE hard disks, each
>200GB or less. The operating systems are Windows XP SP1 and SP2,
>Windows 98, Linux Red Hat 9, and Linux Fedora Core 3.

I use True Image 8 (TI9 demo is available at www.acronis.com, but I
haven't tried it yet) to back up to external HDs.  Works great, fast
recovery.  You'd have to run this under Windows to get automatic
backups.

In your situation, I'd consider backing up each to a local external
drive (one external on each computer), then copy each backup set to
the other computer's external for a little bit of redundancy.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer

> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.

Correct. If you restore the image of the System

> But it didn't work for me. Some logical drive letters seemed to back up
> fine, others didn't. So I have a portion of the files backed up,
> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.

Correct. If you restore the image of the SystemRoot disk of Windows, you must
either:

a) also restore the MBR, so that the new disk will have the same MBR Signature
and the SystemRoot partition will have the same offset

or

b) mount the SYSTEM registry of _this restored Windows image_ on some another
computer and patch the MountedDevices value manually, so it will be the same
drive letter as the original disk was.

Windows assigns the drive letters on "mountdev ID" basis, and the "mountdev ID"
of the usual disk partition on an MBR disk is - 12bytes, 4byte MBR signature of
the disk, then 8byte partition offset (in bytes IIRC).

The HKLM\SYSTEM\MountedDevices registry contains the table of the drive letters
in the form of:

\DosDevices\C: REG_BINARY: mountdev ID
\DosDevices\D: REG_BINARY: mountdev ID
\DosDevices\E: REG_BINARY: mountdev ID

and so on.

If you will not patch this in the new restored Windows disk - then it will boot
and will assign itself as, for instance, T:, while all pathnames of services,
Windows user mode components and COM objects (including the shell components) -
are starting from C:\. This is a major failure, the system seems to be up, but
you cannot log on.

-- 
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com

> Correct. If you restore the image of the SystemRoot disk of Windows, you
must
> either:

Are you talking about restoring a disk image or a partition image?

> > Correct. If you restore the image of the SystemRoot disk of Windows, you
> must
> > either:
> 
> Are you talking about restoring a disk image or a partition image?

Partition. With disk image, all is fine.

-- 
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com

> > > Correct. If you restore the image of the SystemRoot disk of Windows,
you
> > must
> > > either:
> >
> > Are you talking about restoring a disk image or a partition image?
>
> Partition. With disk image, all is fine.

Exactly. It wasn't clear when you have used "image of the SystemRoot disk of
Windows" phrase.

> Exactly. It wasn't clear when you have used "image of the SystemRoot disk of
> Windows" phrase.

Yes, my usage of the word "disk" was bad here. Should be - "partition" or
"volume". "Disk" is usually the physical disk.

SystemRoot is the startup directory of Windows - C:\WINNT, C:\WINDOWS or such.

-- 
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com

"Damien McBain" <askme@for.it> wrote in message 
news:h5z62r3i58qr$.oy0qqzs7fbte.dlg@40tude.net...
> Paul J. Campbell committed to the eternal aether...:
>
>> I have a home network consisting of two computers connected to a
>> small router via 10/100 Mbps ethernet. I have 4 IDE hard disks, each
>> 200GB or less. The operating systems are Windows XP SP1 and SP2,
>> Windows 98, Linux Red Hat 9, and Linux Fedora Core 3.
>>
>> Now for the hard bit - what's the easiest way to keep all of these
>> IDE hard drives backed up, e.g. if one of my hard drives gets errors and
>> fails, I'd preferably like to just replace it with a backed-up
>> hard drive and have it work.
>>
>> I believe I would want one or more backup 'devices' to be connected
>> to my router, i.e. I don't think I want to keep opening up my
>> computers and keep putting in individual backup hard drives every
>> time I want to do a backup. The question is, what should those
>> 'devices' be?
>>
>> I'm a complete novice in backing up, so don't assume that I know
>> anything. By all means include any brand names in your answer.
>>
>> Corporations don't have a lot of time to waste, so how do they do it?
>> I don't necessarily mind spending some money if it will give me
>> reliability and convenience.
>>
>> Would hardware RAID 1 or RAID 5 work?
>> - Backing up: can the backed-up drive(s) sit on the network
>>      outside my computer? The original hard drive is obviously
>>      inside my computer.
>> - Restoring: if one of the hard drives
>>      in my computers fails, can I replace it with a backed-up hard drive
>>      and have it work? Will both Linux and Windows still work?
>>
>> I understand that RAID is rather expensive but it may be worth it
>> depending on the price.
>>
>> --
>> If that's possible, then I think this still leaves to have to deal with
>> one more backup methodology - if some files get deleted accidently, then
>> in the back-ups they will be deleted as well.
>>
>> So I probably need something which also allows me to do a few
>> historical backups. I suppose I need something which can image my hard
>> drives, and (to save on cost) with the option to allow incremental
>> backups on subsequent backups?
>>
>> I tried using Norton Ghost 9 in XP SP1 (whilst XP was running - 
>> apparently
>> it's supposed to support this). I did it the hard way by opening
>> up my computer and connecting the backup drive to it. (As I wrote above,
>>    I'd prefer if I could have the backup drive on the network all the 
>> time,
>>    if possible).
>>
>> But it didn't work for me. Some logical drive letters seemed to back up
>> fine, others didn't. So I have a portion of the files backed up,
>> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
>> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
>> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
>> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.
>> On the web this Windows XP problem is mentioned by many people, but
>> I could never find a solution.
>
> The whole thing would be easier if you ran a file server (which could be a
> very humble computer with a couple of large HDDs in it). You could store
> ALL your files on the server and back it up with tapes or an external hdd.

I had an old PC running as a file server/backup device. However one mistake 
I made. The drives on the backup machine were two SCSI drives and a adaptec 
controller (which I obtained for free). Worked great for 2 years until the 
controller, or both drives packed up.

I could not justify a new SCSI controller, but luckily both my PC's that I 
backed up data FROM are still ok.

I've since changed to a Netgear SC101 with two mirrored 80gb drives as my 
backup drives.

As an extra precaution I also copy mydocs (plus any important stuff) between 
both PC's using Save-N-Sync

Clive

Paul J. Campbell wrote:
> I have a home network consisting of two computers connected to a
> small router via 10/100 Mbps ethernet. I have 4 IDE hard disks, each
> 200GB or less. The operating systems are Windows XP SP1 and SP2,
> Windows 98, Linux Red Hat 9, and Linux Fedora Core 3.
>
> Now for the hard bit - what's the easiest way to keep all of these
> IDE hard drives backed up, e.g. if one of my hard drives gets errors and
> fails, I'd preferably like to just replace it with a backed-up
> hard drive and have it work.
>
> I believe I would want one or more backup 'devices' to be connected
> to my router, i.e. I don't think I want to keep opening up my
> computers and keep putting in individual backup hard drives every
> time I want to do a backup. The question is, what should those
> 'devices' be?
>
> I'm a complete novice in backing up, so don't assume that I know
> anything. By all means include any brand names in your answer.
>
> Corporations don't have a lot of time to waste, so how do they do it?
> I don't necessarily mind spending some money if it will give me
> reliability and convenience.
>
> Would hardware RAID 1 or RAID 5 work?
> - Backing up: can the backed-up drive(s) sit on the network
>      outside my computer? The original hard drive is obviously
>      inside my computer.
> - Restoring: if one of the hard drives
>      in my computers fails, can I replace it with a backed-up hard drive
>      and have it work? Will both Linux and Windows still work?
>
> I understand that RAID is rather expensive but it may be worth it
> depending on the price.
>
> --
> If that's possible, then I think this still leaves to have to deal with
> one more backup methodology - if some files get deleted accidently, then
> in the back-ups they will be deleted as well.
>
> So I probably need something which also allows me to do a few
> historical backups. I suppose I need something which can image my hard
> drives, and (to save on cost) with the option to allow incremental
> backups on subsequent backups?
>
> I tried using Norton Ghost 9 in XP SP1 (whilst XP was running - apparently
> it's supposed to support this). I did it the hard way by opening
> up my computer and connecting the backup drive to it. (As I wrote above,
>    I'd prefer if I could have the backup drive on the network all the time,
>    if possible).
>
> But it didn't work for me. Some logical drive letters seemed to back up
> fine, others didn't. So I have a portion of the files backed up,
> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.
> On the web this Windows XP problem is mentioned by many people, but
> I could never find a solution.
>
> --
> On the web I've researched a few backup devices. Something like
> Netgear Storage Central (SC101) sounds good in that it allows you
> to put in your own hard drives of your choice.
>
> Buffalo TeraStation comes with an attractive 1TB of storage via
> 4x250GB hard drives, but I don't believe the hard drives can be taken out?
>
> In any case if my understanding is correct, both of these devices
> basically allow you to backup files. By themselves, I think they don't
> come with anything to allow me to take full images of my hard disks - is
> that correct?

Many networks are centralised. All comps use one compute's hard drive.
I.e. one comp is the file server.
But maybe with 4*(200GB) to store, that's too much for one comp.
Maybe you should get a Tape Storage thing or something like you
mentioned , that stores 1TB,  then you should go to a linux machine,
and mount the partitions from all the other hard drives. So you can SEE
all other hard drives from one machine, in directories.
Then you'd just copy them over from those directories to the tape
drive.

But that's no good if you want the Whole Image of each hard drive. Then
you'd have to use ghost.
There is a Network edition of Ghost so you can run it from One machine
and ghost all the others. Then you'd copy the images onto your tape
drive.

This is all guess work. i'm a novice on backups too.

Peter wrote:
> > > That function is in your imaging software which runs on a CLIENT system,
> not
> > > storage device.
> > > I boot my client systems with a custom CD, which does a full client PC
> > > disk(s) image(s) to a server storage. Unattended image completion and
> > > shutdown. Another version of it can restart client system after imaging.
> >
> > I'm interested in your custom CD.  Please tell me more about it.
>
> Custom CD is based on WinPE. It automakes connection to a server share.
> Enumerates local hard drives and launches ghost32 unattended image dump for
> each of them.

What prog did you use to write that?  Some kind of scripting?
Automating GUI clicking?
This isn't a function of Ghost, or anything that is always a part of
WinPE.
Norton Ghost v9 is all GUI afaik (but my knowledge don't go far!).


>Then, shuts down PC.

VB?! or some other little EXE your script runs?

> > Custom CD is based on WinPE. It automakes connection to a server share.
> > Enumerates local hard drives and launches ghost32 unattended image dump
for
> > each of them.
>
> What prog did you use to write that?  Some kind of scripting?
> Automating GUI clicking?
> This isn't a function of Ghost, or anything that is always a part of
> WinPE.
> Norton Ghost v9 is all GUI afaik (but my knowledge don't go far!).
>
>
> >Then, shuts down PC.
>
> VB?! or some other little EXE your script runs?

A small tip: ghost32.exe
Another one: BartPE

<jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1133375004.372997.302580@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Custom CD is based on WinPE. It automakes connection to a server share.
> > Enumerates local hard drives and launches ghost32 unattended image dump for
> > each of them.
>
> What prog did you use to write that?  Some kind of scripting?
> Automating GUI clicking?
> This isn't a function of Ghost, or anything that is always a part of
> WinPE.
> Norton Ghost v9 is all GUI afaik (but my knowledge don't go far!).
>
Ghost32 is part of Ghost 7/8 enterprise. It is scriptable.

Too bad it never was part of end-user versions. I found the EXE with google.

"Paul J. Campbell" <paulc8+nospam@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message 
news:43899da0$0$25857$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>I have a home network consisting of two computers connected to a
> small router via 10/100 Mbps ethernet. I have 4 IDE hard disks, each
> 200GB or less. The operating systems are Windows XP SP1 and SP2,
> Windows 98, Linux Red Hat 9, and Linux Fedora Core 3.

Well Done.  Good So Far
>
> Now for the hard bit - what's the easiest way to keep all of these
> IDE hard drives backed up, e.g. if one of my hard drives gets errors and
> fails, I'd preferably like to just replace it with a backed-up
> hard drive and have it work.

Keep all your data on one computer.  (perferably the fastest and perhaps buy 
a bigger hard drive for it too).  That way you only need to worry about 1 
lot of backups.
If your M/Board supports it, setup a hardware raid.  Software Raids are no 
good if the OS shits itself.  Then just add your choice of backup devices
Tape, USB HDD, DVD.  You need this too, because a RAID won't protect your 
data from viruses, fire, theft, etc.

>
> I believe I would want one or more backup 'devices' to be connected
> to my router, i.e. I don't think I want to keep opening up my
> computers and keep putting in individual backup hard drives every
> time I want to do a backup. The question is, what should those
> 'devices' be?

Depends on how much to want to back up.  Look for media that can be stored 
off-site or in a safe place.  (Tape, CD, DVD, ZIP)
>
> I'm a complete novice in backing up, so don't assume that I know
> anything. By all means include any brand names in your answer.

>
> Corporations don't have a lot of time to waste, so how do they do it?
> I don't necessarily mind spending some money if it will give me
> reliability and convenience.

You'd be supprised how many organisations don't give backups a second 
thought until its too late.  A good backup system should be:
7 - 14 day cycle + montly archive + yearly archive.  (or 5 - 10 day cycle if 
weekdays only)
>
> Would hardware RAID 1 or RAID 5 work?

For backups, NO! Reliability, YES!

> - Backing up: can the backed-up drive(s) sit on the network
>     outside my computer? The original hard drive is obviously
>     inside my computer.
> - Restoring: if one of the hard drives
>     in my computers fails, can I replace it with a backed-up hard drive
>     and have it work? Will both Linux and Windows still work?
>
> I understand that RAID is rather expensive but it may be worth it
> depending on the price.

SATA RAID 5.  You need at least 3 disks for RAID 5.
>
> --
> If that's possible, then I think this still leaves to have to deal with
> one more backup methodology - if some files get deleted accidently, then
> in the back-ups they will be deleted as well.
>
> So I probably need something which also allows me to do a few
> historical backups. I suppose I need something which can image my hard
> drives, and (to save on cost) with the option to allow incremental
> backups on subsequent backups?
>
> I tried using Norton Ghost 9 in XP SP1 (whilst XP was running - apparently
> it's supposed to support this). I did it the hard way by opening
> up my computer and connecting the backup drive to it. (As I wrote above,
>   I'd prefer if I could have the backup drive on the network all the time,
>   if possible).
>
> But it didn't work for me. Some logical drive letters seemed to back up
> fine, others didn't. So I have a portion of the files backed up,
> but the hard drive won't boot - Linux Red Hat 9 complains that
> /boot has a 1-byte size difference compared to what is in the
> Master Boot Record. Whereas Windows XP boots up to the XP logo,
> but that's all it shows - it doesn't give me the normal password prompt.
> On the web this Windows XP problem is mentioned by many people, but
> I could never find a solution.
>
> --
> On the web I've researched a few backup devices. Something like
> Netgear Storage Central (SC101) sounds good in that it allows you
> to put in your own hard drives of your choice.
>
> Buffalo TeraStation comes with an attractive 1TB of storage via
> 4x250GB hard drives, but I don't believe the hard drives can be taken out?
>
> In any case if my understanding is correct, both of these devices
> basically allow you to backup files. By themselves, I think they don't
> come with anything to allow me to take full images of my hard disks - is
> that correct?
> 

> If your M/Board supports it, setup a hardware raid.  Software Raids are no
> good if the OS shits itself.

I don't think Dynamic Disk is worse then the so-called "hardware" RAIDs, who
are usually implemented in driver software anyway :)

Microsoft and Veritas are more trustworthy companies for me then the Chinese
RAID chip vendor. At least for El Cheapo hardware Dynamic Disk is probably
better.

Another advantage of Dynamic Disk is easier recovery - the array will assemble
itself on any other controller flavor, the disks can be plugged in to the
controllers in any order.

And yes - RAID is not for backup, it is for redundancy. For instance, RAID will
not allow you to recover the accidentally deleted file.

-- 
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com

"Maxim S. Shatskih" <maxim@storagecraft.com> wrote in message 
news:dms0jn$1274$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru...
>> If your M/Board supports it, setup a hardware raid.  Software Raids are 
>> no
>> good if the OS shits itself.
>
> I don't think Dynamic Disk is worse then the so-called "hardware" RAIDs, 
> who
> are usually implemented in driver software anyway :)
>
> Microsoft and Veritas are more trustworthy companies for me then the 
> Chinese
> RAID chip vendor. At least for El Cheapo hardware Dynamic Disk is probably
> better.
You make a valid point, but what about hardware vendors like Intel and Asus. 
Yes they both make their good and their bad Mobo's, but when it comes down 
to it "You get what you pay for"  We don't want to be sitting around waiting 
for Windoze to reinstall before re-creating our Raid.  Also Windows XP does 
not support any sort of fault tollerance.  So we would still be relying on 
3rd party Asian import software.
>
> Another advantage of Dynamic Disk is easier recovery - the array will 
> assemble
> itself on any other controller flavor, the disks can be plugged in to the
> controllers in any order.
I agree.
>
> And yes - RAID is not for backup, it is for redundancy. For instance, RAID 
> will
> not allow you to recover the accidentally deleted file.
Absolutely!
>
> -- 
> Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
> StorageCraft Corporation
> maxim@storagecraft.com
> http://www.storagecraft.com
> 

> for Windoze to reinstall before re-creating our Raid.  Also Windows XP does
> not support any sort of fault tollerance.  So we would still be relying on

Yes. Windows XP Home does not support Dynamic Disk at all. XP Pro supports
them, but not on a laptop and IIRC not RAID5 (software RAID5 is a bad idea
anyway due to CPU load. With RAID5, the El Cheapo SATA controller is probably
more recommendable then the Dynamic Disk).

-- 
Maxim Shatskih, Windows DDK MVP
StorageCraft Corporation
maxim@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com