Fsarchiver vs partimage
From FSArchiver
Here is a table that summarizes the differences between partimage and fsarchiver:
| fsarchiver | partimage | |
|---|---|---|
| Ability to save/restore standard linux filesystems (ext2, ext3, reiserfs, xfs, jfs) | Yes | Yes |
| Ability to save/restore new generation linux filesystems (ext4, reiser4, btrfs) | Yes | No |
| Ability to save/restore windows ntfs filesystems | Yes (beta) | Yes (experimental) |
| Requires kernel support for the filesystem to work (or ntfs3g for ntfs) | Yes | No |
| Ability to restore the filesystem to a partition which is smaller than the original | Yes | No |
| Ability to restore the filesystem to a partition which is bigger than the original | Yes | Yes (requires resizefs) |
| Require the filesystem tools (mkfs, tunefs, ...) to be installed to save the filesystem: | No | No |
| Require the filesystem tools (mkfs, tunefs, ...) to be installed to restore the filesystem: | Yes | No |
| Checksumming of the data and ability to restore corrupt archives | Yes | No |
| Compression algorithms which are supported | lzo, gzip, bzip2, lzma/xz | gzip, bzip2 |
| Ability to do multi-threaded compression which is faster on recent computer with multiple cores/cpu | Yes | No |
| Ability to encrypt the data with a password | Yes | No |
| Information taken into account to save the filesystem: | Files | Blocks |
| User interface that comes with the program by default: | Text | Semi-graphical |
