how to install hddsuperclone on mint?
- Thread starter abrogard
- Start date
1) A quick web (Google) search for "how to install rpm file on linux mint" returns results that Mint is Debian based, so you need the deb file, not the rpm.
2) A quick search for "how to install software on linux mint" returns results with instructions on how to install deb files, as long as you read far enough down into the instructions.
Google is your friend
2) A quick search for "how to install software on linux mint" returns results with instructions on how to install deb files, as long as you read far enough down into the instructions.
Google is your friend
O.K. I got the correct file and downloaded and installed it. Everything seemed okay.
But it won't run. So I ran the command to install the dependencies but it still won't run.
Here's the terminal output:
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo superclone
[sudo] password for dave:
sudo: superclone: command not found
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo SuperClone
sudo: SuperClone: command not found
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo hddsuperclone
hddsuperclone: error while loading shared libraries: libusb-0.1.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
dave@linuxMint ~ $ clone hddsuperclone-install-depends-deb.sh
clone: command not found
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo hddsuperclone-install-depends-deb.sh
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting 'libusb-0.1-4' for regex 'libusb-0.1'
libusb-0.1-4 is already the newest version (2:0.1.12-28).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
make is already the newest version (4.1-6).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
gcc is already the newest version (4:5.3.1-1ubuntu1).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo hddsuperclone
hddsuperclone: error while loading shared libraries: libusb-0.1.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
dave@linuxMint ~ $
Anyone know anything I can do about that?
But it won't run. So I ran the command to install the dependencies but it still won't run.
Here's the terminal output:
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo superclone
[sudo] password for dave:
sudo: superclone: command not found
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo SuperClone
sudo: SuperClone: command not found
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo hddsuperclone
hddsuperclone: error while loading shared libraries: libusb-0.1.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
dave@linuxMint ~ $ clone hddsuperclone-install-depends-deb.sh
clone: command not found
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo hddsuperclone-install-depends-deb.sh
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting 'libusb-0.1-4' for regex 'libusb-0.1'
libusb-0.1-4 is already the newest version (2:0.1.12-28).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
make is already the newest version (4.1-6).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
gcc is already the newest version (4:5.3.1-1ubuntu1).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo hddsuperclone
hddsuperclone: error while loading shared libraries: libusb-0.1.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
dave@linuxMint ~ $
Anyone know anything I can do about that?
The short answer is that the last time someone had an issue with libusb, it was something with their OS installation.
I just tried to use the latest Mint 20 live iso, but it kept locking up the system when opening Firefox to download, and I have not yet tested it with a manual file transfer.
Maybe try the following commands, the first will update the package lists, and the second will try to update libusb.
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install libusb-0.1
If you end up with the same result, make sure you have installed the proper version of HDDSuperClone for your architecture (32 bit or 64 bit).
If this is not helpful for you, then I will need more information about your OS installation, such as version and architecture. The following commands should provide the information I would ask for:
uname -a
lsb_release -a
I will try to see if I can reproduce the issue if needed, but if it is something with your OS installation, then I will not be able to help any further.
I just tried to use the latest Mint 20 live iso, but it kept locking up the system when opening Firefox to download, and I have not yet tested it with a manual file transfer.
Maybe try the following commands, the first will update the package lists, and the second will try to update libusb.
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install libusb-0.1
If you end up with the same result, make sure you have installed the proper version of HDDSuperClone for your architecture (32 bit or 64 bit).
If this is not helpful for you, then I will need more information about your OS installation, such as version and architecture. The following commands should provide the information I would ask for:
uname -a
lsb_release -a
I will try to see if I can reproduce the issue if needed, but if it is something with your OS installation, then I will not be able to help any further.
Thanks for your help. It is much appreciated.
All this is intended merely to copy a partition from my bad drive to a new drive. The ddrescue manual is just not quite clear enough for me. This hddsuperclone is mentioned as superceding and being better than ddrescue, that's why I'm doing it.
If I'd be better off going the other way then I will... perhaps you'd know just what command I'd need to issue..
meanwhile... here's the results of trying so far...
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo apt-get install libusb-0.1
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting 'libusb-0.1-4' for regex 'libusb-0.1'
libusb-0.1-4 is already the newest version (2:0.1.12-28).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
dave@linuxMint ~ $ hddsuperclone
hddsuperclone: error while loading shared libraries: libusb-0.1.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
dave@linuxMint ~ $ lsb_release -a
LSB Version: core-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-amd64:core-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-noarch:security-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-amd64:security-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-noarch
Distributor ID: LinuxMint
Description: Linux Mint 18 Sarah
Release: 18
Codename: sarah
dave@linuxMint ~ $
All this is intended merely to copy a partition from my bad drive to a new drive. The ddrescue manual is just not quite clear enough for me. This hddsuperclone is mentioned as superceding and being better than ddrescue, that's why I'm doing it.
If I'd be better off going the other way then I will... perhaps you'd know just what command I'd need to issue..
meanwhile... here's the results of trying so far...
dave@linuxMint ~ $ sudo apt-get install libusb-0.1
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting 'libusb-0.1-4' for regex 'libusb-0.1'
libusb-0.1-4 is already the newest version (2:0.1.12-28).
0 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 664 not to upgrade.
dave@linuxMint ~ $ hddsuperclone
hddsuperclone: error while loading shared libraries: libusb-0.1.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
dave@linuxMint ~ $ lsb_release -a
LSB Version: core-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-amd64:core-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-noarch:security-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-amd64:security-9.20160110ubuntu0.2-noarch
Distributor ID: LinuxMint
Description: Linux Mint 18 Sarah
Release: 18
Codename: sarah
dave@linuxMint ~ $
actually I might see the problem right there - is says ubuntu0.2-amd64:core-9..etc.
this machine is indeed an amd machine. I think.
but I've installed hddsuperclone for intel. I was thinking of the other machine - the one from which the bad drive came....
I guess that'd be it?
this machine is indeed an amd machine. I think.
but I've installed hddsuperclone for intel. I was thinking of the other machine - the one from which the bad drive came....
I guess that'd be it?
Yep. That was it. I installed the correct package - didn't uninstall the other, didn't see how to, didn't seem to matter, it installed and it is now running.. I've got a screen up.. now to figure out how to save the partition...
I thank you for your patient help... and sorry about my blunder...
few minutes later: well it's working away cloning. Actually I had hoped to copy only the data partition in case there was a space problem - the original being a WD 2T and the new one a Seagate 2T and someone somewhere saying if there wasn't enough room you'd know nothing 'till the very end of the copy (on ddrescue I think) when it'd suddenly fail and you've got nothing.
But hddsuperclone doesn't seem to give any options so I've turned it loose .... here's hoping for the best... the remaining time is 0:18:53:0 right now so I guess that's 18hours?
I'll let you know how it goes.
I thank you for your patient help... and sorry about my blunder...
few minutes later: well it's working away cloning. Actually I had hoped to copy only the data partition in case there was a space problem - the original being a WD 2T and the new one a Seagate 2T and someone somewhere saying if there wasn't enough room you'd know nothing 'till the very end of the copy (on ddrescue I think) when it'd suddenly fail and you've got nothing.
But hddsuperclone doesn't seem to give any options so I've turned it loose .... here's hoping for the best... the remaining time is 0:18:53:0 right now so I guess that's 18hours?
I'll let you know how it goes.
Good catch, I would not have known that. I did not know there was a way to install a program for specifically AMD or Intel.
Cloning the whole drive is better than trying to do it by partition, that way you don't have to worry about something being at a different offset. And as long as the destination is a disk and not an image file, HDDSuperClone would have gave a warning if the destination disk was smaller than the source.
Cloning the whole drive is better than trying to do it by partition, that way you don't have to worry about something being at a different offset. And as long as the destination is a disk and not an image file, HDDSuperClone would have gave a warning if the destination disk was smaller than the source.
Well we're closing in on it. The cloning finished without a hitch - and now I've got two drives that won't mount!
I got the error message when I double clicked on it to mount it: (had to copy this out longhand - I don't know how to keep those messages as a file)
Error mounting /dev/sdc4 at media /dave/ 7a0802210801dd4f: command line "mount -t "ntfs" -o
"unhelper = udisks2, nodev, nosuid, uid = 1000" /dev/sdc4" "/media/dave/7a0802210801dd4f exited with non zero exit status 14:
The disk contains an unclean file system (0,0)
Metadata kept in Windows cache refused to mount
Failed to mount '/dev/sdc4': Operation not permitted
The NTFS partitioni s in an unsafe state please resume and shutdown Windows fully (no hibernation or fast restarting) or mount volume read only with 'ro' option.
I do not know how to put together the command line for mounting.
I believe we mount partitions - got told on a forum recently, maybe this one - and was hoping I could mount the data partition of this windows disk simply to read the data, rather than have to mount the whole 'windows' disk: thereby avoiding mounting options or instructions that precede a disk built to boot.
Or to put it another way I was hoping to merely clone the data from this windows disk and leave the 'windows' folder and all such technical os stuff alone.
Maybe i can do that now? On this cloned disk?
And the 'rescue' of the original disk looks almost trivial now, surely? I mean if i presume this new clone disk that I've just made unmountable by cloning can easily be put back into the state it was before the clone then presumably so can the original bad disk.
Despite what the shop says the original (Western Digital, 'WD') is as healthy as the SMART test said it was - the whole problem is a Windows problem. Would you say?
I got the error message when I double clicked on it to mount it: (had to copy this out longhand - I don't know how to keep those messages as a file)
Error mounting /dev/sdc4 at media /dave/ 7a0802210801dd4f: command line "mount -t "ntfs" -o
"unhelper = udisks2, nodev, nosuid, uid = 1000" /dev/sdc4" "/media/dave/7a0802210801dd4f exited with non zero exit status 14:
The disk contains an unclean file system (0,0)
Metadata kept in Windows cache refused to mount
Failed to mount '/dev/sdc4': Operation not permitted
The NTFS partitioni s in an unsafe state please resume and shutdown Windows fully (no hibernation or fast restarting) or mount volume read only with 'ro' option.
I do not know how to put together the command line for mounting.
I believe we mount partitions - got told on a forum recently, maybe this one - and was hoping I could mount the data partition of this windows disk simply to read the data, rather than have to mount the whole 'windows' disk: thereby avoiding mounting options or instructions that precede a disk built to boot.
Or to put it another way I was hoping to merely clone the data from this windows disk and leave the 'windows' folder and all such technical os stuff alone.
Maybe i can do that now? On this cloned disk?
And the 'rescue' of the original disk looks almost trivial now, surely? I mean if i presume this new clone disk that I've just made unmountable by cloning can easily be put back into the state it was before the clone then presumably so can the original bad disk.
Despite what the shop says the original (Western Digital, 'WD') is as healthy as the SMART test said it was - the whole problem is a Windows problem. Would you say?