Re: [Bug-ddrescue] Suggestions to rename "logfile"

[Felix Ehlermann]

Dear Antonio,

a brief remark to your comment:

>Felix Ehlermann wrote:
>> If the user is writing to an image file ddrescue should just
automatically
>> create "<outfile>.resumestate" next to the outfile unless
--no-resume-state
>> or a different location for the resume-state is specified.
>
> In addition to creating unrequested files, which I think ddrescue should 
> never do, this could create more problems than it solves. For example, 
> how could ddrescue differentiate an existing "<outfile>.resumestate" 
> created in a previous run from one stale file that the user forgot to 
> delete?

I don't consider the 'unrequested' file a problem - if someone doesn't read
the manual he can't really complain.
Maybe he will even look up what this 'magic' file actually is ;)

But I would also be happy if the parameter becomes mandatory (just like
Adrien Cordonnier suggested earlier).
This, too, might encourage more people to find out what the file is used
for.


Re "how could ddrescue differentiate":
ddrescue will not be able to differentiate - but the same problem exists
with any stale file or previously used destination-device that did not get
zeroed.
(Unless the user got a proper logfile, of course..)

Yet new users will not have any files from a previous run at all
(obviously.. otherwise they'd not be 'new' users) => No problem in their
case.
Experienced users certainly are capable of removing the image along with the
resumestate.


I guess for most users on this list the change is quite minor and probably
not really necessary.
But for new/unexperienced users it will make a big difference if they
"forget" to create a logfile. I think that from their perspective a "less
subtle" hint to really use a logfile would help them not to make this
mistake.
Therefore in my opinion the drawback of having to type --no-resumestate is
minor and quite acceptable in order to make ddrescue more "user friendly".


Kind Regards
Felix Ehlermann