topic title: Writing antiX iso image on USB flash drive using dd.
Posts: 80
Rademes
Joined: 26 Dec 2016
#1
Good day!
Can I write antiX-16_x64-full.iso image file on USB flash drive using command:
dd if=/home/..../antiX-16_x64-full.iso of=/dev/sd* bs=1M; sync

I am asking, because I have read on forums, that using dd is the most reliable way of writing isohybrid images on USB flash drives. Also it is possible to
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://www.debian.org/CD/faq/#write-usb"
linktext was:"write Debian images using this method"
====================================
. What about antiX?
Posts: 2,238
dolphin_oracle
Joined: 16 Dec 2007
#2
Rademes wrote:Good day!
Can I write antiX-16_x64-full.iso image file on USB flash drive using command:
dd if=/home/..../antiX-16_x64-full.iso of=/dev/sd* bs=1M; sync

I am asking, because I have read on forums, that using dd is the most reliable way of writing isohybrid images on USB flash drives. Also it is possible to
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://www.debian.org/CD/faq/#write-usb"
linktext was:"write Debian images using this method"
====================================
. What about antiX?
it will work, but since the resulting live-usb will be read only, none of the persistence options will work and custom options you might select will not be saved.
Posts: 850
fatmac
Joined: 26 Jul 2012
#3
I always use dd to create pendrive images, I either use it as a tranferrable live distro, or for installing to a disk. __{{emoticon}}__
Posts: 80
Rademes
Joined: 26 Dec 2016
#4
dolphin_oracle wrote:it will work, but since the resulting live-usb will be read only, none of the persistence options will work and custom options you might select will not be saved.
That is one of the reasons, why I prefer writing Live systems on USB flash drives using dd utility. I can not accidentally delete or damage files on Live USB drive during system usage. Also I figured out, that it is better to use fast SDHC cards like Kingston SDA10/16GB, because they have faster read and write speeds. For example mine has 85 MB/s read speed using USB3.0 card reader, just like my HDD.
Posts: 1,139
masinick
Joined: 26 Apr 2008
#5
Rademes wrote:
dolphin_oracle wrote:it will work, but since the resulting live-usb will be read only, none of the persistence options will work and custom options you might select will not be saved.
That is one of the reasons, why I prefer writing Live systems on USB flash drives using dd utility. I can not accidentally delete or damage files on Live USB drive during system usage. Also I figured out, that it is better to use fast SDHC cards like Kingston SDA10/16GB, because they have faster read and write speeds. For example mine has 85 MB/s read speed using USB3.0 card reader, just like my HDD.
I did the same thing that you did and it works fine, as long as you understand that when you choose this method, you do not get any of the persistence features, such as the Frugal persistence file added to the USB device - because a read only image is created. If you don't need that feature, I'd argue that dd is faster, easy, and reliable.

But to also commend the team, the persistence features that are available with antiX are equal to or superior to other distributions capable of loading into memory, then saving state changes to a file or device. That's what persistence gives you when you're running"Live", and believe me, there are advantages, such as really fast boot times, the ability to carry around removable media, such as a really small USB like the Kingston models you use.

I haven't seen any scenarios where I ever wiped out any system-related files using antiX or other distributions. You'd have to be running as root to even have that possibility, and persistence does not overwrite things like the kernel image or core utilities.

Also, yes, dd works great with Debian images too.
You can further extend that to say that it works on any distribution with the dd utility and the appropriate access rights.