On first read I assumed you were using
dd to create the images and balenaEtcher to restore -- until it was pointed out you probably used the latter for both tasks. So: Below I'm referring to two different methodologies regarding backup, one the "blob image" I've associated with
dd (but also applies to what balenaEtcher does), and the other "file based", which is what I'm recommending.
It [was upon first read ;)] implicit in this you are using
dd to keep a backup (but if you are using balenaEtcher, it is much the same thing in terms of the image format). While this is very easy to do, it is very inflexible (as well as being wasteful resource wise, ie., takes a long time and uses a lot of bandwidth).
Is there a way to do this job
There is not an existing one that I'm aware of using a blob image copy (as from
dd), and although it would not be impossible to implement one, that is going to be a mountain more headache and effort than just using a backup methodology that is intended to be usable live remotely, such as
or at least restore an entire folder remotely?
This is a bit of a distinct issue. Using a system that copies files (such as
tar) instead of raw blocks (such a
dd), it is pretty simple and self-explanatory once you understand the methodology.1
It is also possible using a blob image, but not really worthwhile because you will have to use a file-based method for the restore, by mounting the image somewhere and copying them from there. Since you could count "the root filesystem" as "a folder", you could do this with
/, but that is going to be the most ponderous, inefficient, and error prone choice of all.
- Which I won't bother with because you will find decades worth of examples, tutorials, how-tos, etc. regarding
tar, online, including here.