Newbie: Full install on USB

[costas]

Hi,

I did a lot of research (so pls no flames) but i couldn't exactly find out the following:

I want a FULL install on a USB. Basically treat it like an SSD.

I found some posts where ppl have problems with UEFI and Kali 2 etc. etc. but nowhere exact instructions and advantages vs. disadvantages.
BTW my laptop is older so it's a classic BIOS.

My questions are:

1. What are the disadvantages of the USB install vs. SSD? Speed, easier corruption of data, etc. ?
except the obvious of having a USB sticking out every time ....

2. Where should GRUB go? on the main SSD (has Win7) or on the USB ?

3. I also couldn't find info on partitions. Is it best to leave the defaults?

Thanks in advance!

[CookieDough]

1. I tried it on a fast USB 3.0 drive. All I can say is I was satisfied performance wise. I'd say just buy a good USB drive, then you should be fine. Some cheaper drives can get corrupted by the frequent access of the operation system.

2. USB

3. Don't know what you mean. Do you want a seperate /home partition? I don't think this is necessary with USB installed Kali. Just use the guide on the main page.

[tek911]

I am also in the preference camp of a full install to usb. USB 3.0 makes all the difference as i used to run a 2.0 full install kali instance (kali 1, not kali 2).

1) I think USB vs SSD really comes down to selection of quality usb or ssd drives. From my experience like most things quality will vary. Out of my own ignorance i can't see much down side comparatively between ssd and usb.
2) Grub should go on teh USB. When i first was doing the Kali 2.0 SANA full install, i think i found a small bug in the installer (i chock it up to my own ignorance and not a bug) but when i do the full install, even when i selected the external usb device for the install, it would install grub on teh other harddrive i had, every single time. it wasnt until i yanked the other drive that the grub install when. (it was driving me crazy for a bit).
3) Personal preference. Lots of pros and cons, and its a religious choice for some but unless you plan on accessing your /home or any other partitions from other OS's i'd go one overall partition to start with.

Also here's a very good link pro and conning full installs versus persistent USB: https://www.maketecheasier.com/persi...l-install-usb/

I'm trying to sort a few things out myself with my kali 2.0 usb (full install, luks encrypted partition, 64gb usb 3.0 drive):
a) Why is live with encrypted persistence more popular than full install to usb? Full install you get the luxury of booting to an actual login with your root password, you get more of a traditional package update flow keeping your packages updated all the time, sure there is more of a requirement space wise but honestly if you're going to go through live and persistence why not go further? If anyone has like that major flaw in the full install i would appreciate hearing it.
b) being that live persistence is more popular (its the approach lined out in the kali official documentation ) i'm having trouble finding the steps needed to make my bootable kali 2.0 drive uefi ready when you've done a full install approach. (basically im missing the files that would traditionally go into the /EFI/ubuntu directory) I'm basically looking at this guide .

Any way thanks in advance, and i love having Kali 2.0 on a small thumbdrive, i keep it in my wallet.