View Full Version : CCC Caution... or "why I'm an SD fan."

12-02-2007, 01:28 AM
Doing some testing for a developer under 10.5.1, I mucked up my drive. Fortunately, I had a CCC clone from the day before, and just swapped out one drive for the other.

The good news: it booted, and I only lost about 18 hours worth of stuff.
The bad news: CCC isn't as accurate as SD (nor anywhere near as fast!) Several hidden system files ended up visible; some significant number of permissions were wrong; and some ACLs just "materialized" out of nowhere, requiring a few trips to the terminal.

CCC served it's main purpose: to get me thru until SD for Leopard arrives. But for those who are wondering why spend the bucks on SD... well, those are the reasons.

12-03-2007, 08:26 AM
Hhmm, a pity. That also means that the backup-bouncer-0.1.2 test is not good as that showed that CCC did pass all tests successfully.

Cheers, Fons.

12-03-2007, 06:29 PM
your problem does not reflect most peoples results. The Version Tracker and MacUpdate comments do not indicate you have a common problem. You should report this to CCC and to MacFixit. Lets find out if there is a real issue.

12-03-2007, 08:45 PM
Naturally, results will vary. If everyone had the problem, you are correct, it would be common knowledge. Having spent over 25 years as a programmer on Apple brand machines, I have some familiarity with the issues involved.

I should point out that the drive I was cloning has over 2 million files occupying 289 gigs of drive space.

When I report this, I'll get back a request to verify it and run various tests. Since each backup takes 58 minutes, and I'm still trying to earn a living, I'm afraid I don't have the time to devote to it.

That said, the results were, for me, as stated. I'm not shilling for Dave. :-) and...I'll copy the CCC author, as well.

(In fact, I just now -before completing this reply- checked the CCC clone I made an hour ago: Mach_kernel.cfgsys; iNode16068125; my Authorization for MOTU and several other finder-invisible files on my source drive, are plainly visible on the cloned drive.)

It would be interesting to know if anyone else here has checked for, and seen a similar result. So far, thru several updates, and thru at least two full, from-scratch backups using CCC, this has been 100% repeatable.



"I reserve the right to be corrected at any time."
http://tracyvalleau.com http://photosbyvalleau.com

12-03-2007, 08:58 PM
Hhmm, a pity. That also means that the backup-bouncer-0.1.2 test is not good as that showed that CCC did pass all tests successfully.

Not necessarily true: it may have passed the test wherein CCC did a fine job of cloning.

Note that I'm not saying my anecdotal experience is universal truth... only that it happened to me... several times.

I would assume, in fact, that my situation is the exception, not the rule. CCC has a good reputation.

12-05-2007, 07:58 PM
Quick followup: I've now tested CCC on two more machines, with the same type of result (invisible files being made visible.) Hardly a crushing issue, but I mention it only to indicate that it was not (at least for me) and isolated incident.

Bottom line: use it!...... until SD comes out :)

12-06-2007, 12:02 PM
OK... last word, published with permission. I reported the CCC issues to Mike, developer of CCC, and here is his reply:

"Hi Tracy:

Thanks for the info, and tact :-) I'm working to get an update to CCC out the door by New Years Day that should address most of the Leopard-specific issues.


12-06-2007, 02:53 PM
For some reason I feel products like these all need to be supported, so I've paid for both SD and CarbonCopyCloner. A programmer or company who cares enough to try to do a good job needs support.

And we probably benefit from a bit of competition.

12-06-2007, 08:02 PM
I've also been testing Intego's Personal Backup X4, while we're waiting for SD to hatch. I corresponded with Intego tech support, who assured me that their cloning engine preserves all metadata, hard links, permissions, etc.

So far, my Leopard initial/incremental clones seem to be very solid, and the Intego UI is actually pretty slick. The downside is cost for this app. I agree that giving props to developers who are working hard to support the Mac community is a good thing. I'll be looking forward to the new SD like everyone else.