Comments on: The State of Backup and Cloning Tools under Mac OS X http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/ Mac OS X Gordian Knots Smashed Thu, 24 Jul 2008 01:13:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11 by: n8gray.org: Backup Bouncer is Working, Confusing, Annoying Developers http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-37162 Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:06:20 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-37162 <p>[...] The FIFO/device file tests are not included in either the “critical” or “important” set of tests. So I’m saying (and have always said) that most users, even most power users, won’t care about them. So why test for them at all? Consider the situation before Maurits’ blogged on backups and BB existed. Most people, myself included, didn’t even know what the full set of OS X filesystem object types and metadata was. Maurits filled us in on what existed, but knowing how to test for preservation was still a black art. BB was meant to democratize that testing, but also to act as an exhaustive test set. (I don’t claim to have achieved even close to 100% coverage, but that’s the goal.) So it’s important to me that BB include tests for any metadatum or filesystem object that can conceivably have a reason to be backed up. [...]</p> […] The FIFO/device file tests are not included in either the “critical” or “important” set of tests. So I’m saying (and have always said) that most users, even most power users, won’t care about them. So why test for them at all? Consider the situation before Maurits’ blogged on backups and BB existed. Most people, myself included, didn’t even know what the full set of OS X filesystem object types and metadata was. Maurits filled us in on what existed, but knowing how to test for preservation was still a black art. BB was meant to democratize that testing, but also to act as an exhaustive test set. (I don’t claim to have achieved even close to 100% coverage, but that’s the goal.) So it’s important to me that BB include tests for any metadatum or filesystem object that can conceivably have a reason to be backed up. […]

]]> by: best back up for a mac http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-37071 Fri, 30 May 2008 05:11:43 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-37071 <p>[...] [...]</p> […] […]

]]> by: Rsyncx to backup Mac | Tongfamily.com http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-34016 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 05:39:20 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-34016 <p>[...] Plasticfutures.org has a good deeper analysis of the various tools. [...]</p> […] Plasticfutures.org has a good deeper analysis of the various tools. […]

]]> by: PG http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-25012 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:00:43 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-25012 <p>Carbon Copy Cloner 3.1 has now been released: http://www.bombich.com/software/ccc.html</p> <p>According to an independent backup-integrity testing tool (Backup-Bouncer: http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/04/27/introducing-backup-bouncer/ ), it successfully preserves ALL metadata. </p> <p>maurits - I saw your posts on the Backup-Bouncer site: I'm aware of your time constraints, so I don't expect a full update of the test results. But, I think it would be of great benefit if you would add a brief "update" note, simply saying that (a) some of the tools (e.g. CCC) have been updated, with much better results, and (b) a link to Backup-Bouncer.</p> <p>Otherwise, people coming across this page are going to be misinformed about the current state of affairs, and might spend a fair amount of time tracking current information down.</p> <p>Thanks for this great work - you really started something, and a lot of good results have come from it!</p> <p>PG</p> Carbon Copy Cloner 3.1 has now been released: http://www.bombich.com/software/ccc.html

According to an independent backup-integrity testing tool (Backup-Bouncer: http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/04/27/introducing-backup-bouncer/ ), it successfully preserves ALL metadata.

maurits - I saw your posts on the Backup-Bouncer site: I’m aware of your time constraints, so I don’t expect a full update of the test results. But, I think it would be of great benefit if you would add a brief “update” note, simply saying that (a) some of the tools (e.g. CCC) have been updated, with much better results, and (b) a link to Backup-Bouncer.

Otherwise, people coming across this page are going to be misinformed about the current state of affairs, and might spend a fair amount of time tracking current information down.

Thanks for this great work - you really started something, and a lot of good results have come from it!

PG

]]> by: Rob http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-22313 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:49:02 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-22313 <p>P.S. Carbon Copy Cloner 3.0.1 is now based on asr. But even though asr does not always preserve metadata, Carbon Copy Cloner does copy metadata including BSD Flags, Locked, Extended Attributes, Symlink Ownership, etc. </p> <p>But there may be a bug in 3.0.1. If the file is locked, CCC may not always copy extended attributes. I hope that gets fixed soon.</p> P.S. Carbon Copy Cloner 3.0.1 is now based on asr. But even though asr does not always preserve metadata, Carbon Copy Cloner does copy metadata including BSD Flags, Locked, Extended Attributes, Symlink Ownership, etc.

But there may be a bug in 3.0.1. If the file is locked, CCC may not always copy extended attributes. I hope that gets fixed soon.

]]> by: Rob http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-22294 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:34:47 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-22294 <p>I don't know why the author is tracking the "locked Flag". Mac OS X uses the BSD flag "uchg" to lock or unlock a file. </p> <p>All you need to do is check to see whether the BSD flags are being copied. If they are, then the "locked" status of the file will also be copied.</p> I don’t know why the author is tracking the “locked Flag”. Mac OS X uses the BSD flag “uchg” to lock or unlock a file.

All you need to do is check to see whether the BSD flags are being copied. If they are, then the “locked” status of the file will also be copied.

]]> by: Rob http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-22292 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:31:55 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-22292 <p>I can confirm that asr in its file-copy mode is still badly broken in Tiger 10.4.11. (The asr version is 72).</p> <p>I created two disk images and put some files in the first. Then I used asr to copy the files from the first disk image to the second.</p> <ol> <li>No extended attributes were copied.</li> <li>No BSD flags were copied.</li> <li>No locked flags were copied (which are just a type of BSD flag).</li> <li>Symlink ownership was not copied.</li> </ol> <p>And it really messed up the Symlink ownership. One of symlinks had the owner of rob:dummy. When the symlink was copied, it became root:rob. How it did this is beyond my comprehension.</p> <p>Come on Apple. Why don’t you fix these long-standing bugs!</p> I can confirm that asr in its file-copy mode is still badly broken in Tiger 10.4.11. (The asr version is 72).

I created two disk images and put some files in the first. Then I used asr to copy the files from the first disk image to the second.

  1. No extended attributes were copied.
  2. No BSD flags were copied.
  3. No locked flags were copied (which are just a type of BSD flag).
  4. Symlink ownership was not copied.

And it really messed up the Symlink ownership. One of symlinks had the owner of rob:dummy. When the symlink was copied, it became root:rob. How it did this is beyond my comprehension.

Come on Apple. Why don’t you fix these long-standing bugs!

]]> by: chipwreck | blog » archive » Backup script using RsyncX http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-21693 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 18:55:23 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-21693 <p>[...] More details can be found here: blog.plasticsfuture.org [...]</p> […] More details can be found here: blog.plasticsfuture.org […]

]]> by: New Home Server | Robert Accettura’s Fun With Wordage http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-20679 Wed, 02 Jan 2008 03:30:19 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-20679 <p>[...] Next I wanted to replicate data across the drives on a cron. Initially I was thinking rsync, since as of 10.4, it’s resource-fork aware. It turns out that’s not really true. I ended up going back to SuperDuper to copy between the drives. It only copies changed files, and once a week will delete removed files (so if you accidentally delete something, there’s still a chance to recover, unless you do it at the wrong time). Not a bad solution IMHO. Still would prefer rsync more. Initial backup took less than 1/2 hour. Just a few minutes should be enough to keep the disks in sync. I briefly considered setting up RAID, but decided against it since RAID is not backup. It doesn’t protect against things like corruption. [...]</p> […] Next I wanted to replicate data across the drives on a cron. Initially I was thinking rsync, since as of 10.4, it’s resource-fork aware. It turns out that’s not really true. I ended up going back to SuperDuper to copy between the drives. It only copies changed files, and once a week will delete removed files (so if you accidentally delete something, there’s still a chance to recover, unless you do it at the wrong time). Not a bad solution IMHO. Still would prefer rsync more. Initial backup took less than 1/2 hour. Just a few minutes should be enough to keep the disks in sync. I briefly considered setting up RAID, but decided against it since RAID is not backup. It doesn’t protect against things like corruption. […]

]]> by: Blog 2 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-20024 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:36:46 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-20024 <p>[...] The State of Backup and Cloning Tools under Mac OS X [...]</p> […] The State of Backup and Cloning Tools under Mac OS X […]

]]> by: Charles Young http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-19819 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:54:02 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-19819 <p>I've had a lot of success with Bacula. [www.bacula.org].</p> <p>It's great if you've got a few machines to backup and can spare a few hours to configure it.</p> <p>There is a good resource for bacula for OSX at http://www.haught.org/howto/detail/tag/tech/item/bacula_osx/</p> <p>and a prebuilt binary client at http://www.pixelchaos.net/</p> <p>As for most backup applications (as opposed to DR), it is predicated on the idea of saving your data rather than your machine, but there is some flexibility to recover from bare metal if you want to go down that path. Personally I wouldn't generally bother.</p> I’ve had a lot of success with Bacula. [www.bacula.org].

It’s great if you’ve got a few machines to backup and can spare a few hours to configure it.

There is a good resource for bacula for OSX at http://www.haught.org/howto/detail/tag/tech/item/bacula_osx/

and a prebuilt binary client at http://www.pixelchaos.net/

As for most backup applications (as opposed to DR), it is predicated on the idea of saving your data rather than your machine, but there is some flexibility to recover from bare metal if you want to go down that path. Personally I wouldn’t generally bother.

]]> by: Anders http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18585 Fri, 16 Nov 2007 16:01:34 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18585 <p>You should look at "Unison" http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/ I use it to keep my laptop files synced. I used macports to get and install. http://www.macports.org/ enjoy!</p> You should look at “Unison” http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/ I use it to keep my laptop files synced. I used macports to get and install. http://www.macports.org/ enjoy!

]]> by: Matt & Jen Simerson » Backing up a Mac http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18318 Mon, 12 Nov 2007 16:14:25 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18318 <p>[...] I owned Synchronize! Pro years ago but gave up on it during the switch to OS X. CCC was the perfect (and only) tool for duplicating OS X drives for quite a while. I used and recommended it for a few years. It’s so good and cheap that I paid the suggested donation for it several times. It “just works.” However, CCC has grown rather long in the tooth. As new versions of OS X arrived, it has been slow to get updated and even the latest version today does not support all of OS X’s file metadata features. [...]</p> […] I owned Synchronize! Pro years ago but gave up on it during the switch to OS X. CCC was the perfect (and only) tool for duplicating OS X drives for quite a while. I used and recommended it for a few years. It’s so good and cheap that I paid the suggested donation for it several times. It “just works.” However, CCC has grown rather long in the tooth. As new versions of OS X arrived, it has been slow to get updated and even the latest version today does not support all of OS X’s file metadata features. […]

]]> by: Articles http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18265 Sun, 11 Nov 2007 15:53:32 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18265 <p>I am very grateful for your efforts. I have just tried, for the first time, to creat a bootable copy of my internal disc on an external drive, using Disk Utility. </p> <p>It failed because my copy of Disk Utility (Mac OS X version 10.4.10) cannot drag-and-drop the source and destination devices!</p> <p>A known but unfixed bug, apparently:-(</p> <p>I started searching for alternatives and uncovered your can of worms! I am rather surprised that such a basic requirement as backing up bootable versions of the filestore is in such a mess:</p> I am very grateful for your efforts. I have just tried, for the first time, to creat a bootable copy of my internal disc on an external drive, using Disk Utility.

It failed because my copy of Disk Utility (Mac OS X version 10.4.10) cannot drag-and-drop the source and destination devices!

A known but unfixed bug, apparently:-(

I started searching for alternatives and uncovered your can of worms! I am rather surprised that such a basic requirement as backing up bootable versions of the filestore is in such a mess:

]]> by: dp http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18031 Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:39:33 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-18031 <p>any thoughts on synk pro?</p> any thoughts on synk pro?

]]> by: Keith Dancey http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-13479 Thu, 02 Aug 2007 22:01:53 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-13479 <p>I am very grateful for your efforts. I have just tried, for the first time, to creat a bootable copy of my internal disc on an external drive, using Disk Utility. </p> <p>It failed because my copy of Disk Utility (Mac OS X version 10.4.10) cannot drag-and-drop the source and destination devices!</p> <p>A known but unfixed bug, apparently:-(</p> <p>I started searching for alternatives and uncovered your can of worms! I am rather surprised that such a basic requirement as backing up bootable versions of the filestore is in such a mess:-(</p> I am very grateful for your efforts. I have just tried, for the first time, to creat a bootable copy of my internal disc on an external drive, using Disk Utility.

It failed because my copy of Disk Utility (Mac OS X version 10.4.10) cannot drag-and-drop the source and destination devices!

A known but unfixed bug, apparently:-(

I started searching for alternatives and uncovered your can of worms! I am rather surprised that such a basic requirement as backing up bootable versions of the filestore is in such a mess:-(

]]> by: mark_usha http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-13180 Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:56:47 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-13180 <p>@ Peter da Silva Some of SuperDuper's features you're missing are available after registering. It's has some shortcomings, agreed, but it copies all metadata.</p> <p>I think maurits recommendations are based on "how good are they at metadata preservation". If someone can do without BSD-Flags, Extended Attributes or ACL (ACL-support in TIger is normally turned off) he'll be happy with old RsyncX' rsync (which preserves the creation date!!) and find workarounds for known bugs (e.g. avoiding uappnd-flags on directories).</p> <p>Someone here asked for a report on rdiff-backup: the development version of rdiff-backup (1.1.12) loses the Z-Finderflag (busy-flag), the "locked" or BSD-ish "uchg"-flag, all BSD-flags, extended attributes on symlinks (<em>attributes elsewhere are preserved</em>, if py-xattr 0.4 is installed!!) and ACLs (1). rdiff-backup cannot copy device files and fifos.</p> <p>This is promising for a development version, and rdiff-backup offers some "time machine" functions (restore to any given date of hour in the past)!</p> <p>(1) rdiff-backup actually does support ACLs on other platforms, but not (yet??) on MacOS X (pylibacl refuses to install on a Mac).</p> @ Peter da Silva Some of SuperDuper’s features you’re missing are available after registering. It’s has some shortcomings, agreed, but it copies all metadata.

I think maurits recommendations are based on “how good are they at metadata preservation”. If someone can do without BSD-Flags, Extended Attributes or ACL (ACL-support in TIger is normally turned off) he’ll be happy with old RsyncX’ rsync (which preserves the creation date!!) and find workarounds for known bugs (e.g. avoiding uappnd-flags on directories).

Someone here asked for a report on rdiff-backup: the development version of rdiff-backup (1.1.12) loses the Z-Finderflag (busy-flag), the “locked” or BSD-ish “uchg”-flag, all BSD-flags, extended attributes on symlinks (attributes elsewhere are preserved, if py-xattr 0.4 is installed!!) and ACLs (1). rdiff-backup cannot copy device files and fifos.

This is promising for a development version, and rdiff-backup offers some “time machine” functions (restore to any given date of hour in the past)!

(1) rdiff-backup actually does support ACLs on other platforms, but not (yet??) on MacOS X (pylibacl refuses to install on a Mac).

]]> by: Peter da Silva http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-13055 Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:12:57 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-13055 <p>OK, here's the deal. You never did explain what the basis of your comparisons are. You "partially recommend" a program that I <em>know</em> preserves less of what I would have thought was genuinely critical metadata than one you "don't recommend", but you do make one point... you really recommend SuperDuper. Since it <em>is</em> free for basic use, it can't hurt to try it.</p> <p>Of course... it's not really a backup program, it's a mirroring program, but given the price of backup media these days that seems to be what you're stuck with.</p> <p>So I go to make a backup using SuperDuper.</p> <p>You know what?</p> <p>It's missing what I would have thought was totally basic functionality for a mirroring program. You can't select the folder the mirror is going to be rooted in. You either have to blow away the whole destination disk, or create a disk image (which uses more disk space and memory). You can't select the folder you're going to back up, it's the whole disk or nothing.</p> <p>Is this what they consider advanced functionality? It doesn't seem like it.</p> <p>PLEASE, could you go into more detail <em>why</em> you recommend some programs over others? What metadata are you considering essential, and what metadata are you letting slide, and why? And what basic functionality are you assuming any program should have... because SuperDuper is about the most basic non-functional backup program I've ever fired up.</p> OK, here’s the deal. You never did explain what the basis of your comparisons are. You “partially recommend” a program that I know preserves less of what I would have thought was genuinely critical metadata than one you “don’t recommend”, but you do make one point… you really recommend SuperDuper. Since it is free for basic use, it can’t hurt to try it.

Of course… it’s not really a backup program, it’s a mirroring program, but given the price of backup media these days that seems to be what you’re stuck with.

So I go to make a backup using SuperDuper.

You know what?

It’s missing what I would have thought was totally basic functionality for a mirroring program. You can’t select the folder the mirror is going to be rooted in. You either have to blow away the whole destination disk, or create a disk image (which uses more disk space and memory). You can’t select the folder you’re going to back up, it’s the whole disk or nothing.

Is this what they consider advanced functionality? It doesn’t seem like it.

PLEASE, could you go into more detail why you recommend some programs over others? What metadata are you considering essential, and what metadata are you letting slide, and why? And what basic functionality are you assuming any program should have… because SuperDuper is about the most basic non-functional backup program I’ve ever fired up.

]]> by: MacUser http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-11012 Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:42:03 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-11012 <p>Latest version of Personal Backup X4 worked flawlessly for me, preserving all metadata (except inodes number)</p> Latest version of Personal Backup X4 worked flawlessly for me, preserving all metadata (except inodes number)

]]> by: mickintosh http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-9352 Mon, 28 May 2007 13:14:09 +0000 http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/#comment-9352 <p>Regarding BruClone desktop version (http://www.tolisgroup.com/products/macosx/bruclone/) worked flawlessly, even with the incremental cloning</p> <p>While other apps like Intego Personnal Backup, fails to deliver even on a simple cloning.</p> Regarding BruClone desktop version (http://www.tolisgroup.com/products/macosx/bruclone/) worked flawlessly, even with the incremental cloning

While other apps like Intego Personnal Backup, fails to deliver even on a simple cloning.

]]>