PDA

View Full Version : "all files" doesn't include /usr?


janiner
07-13-2008, 06:48 PM
I just upgraded my iMac from Tiger to Leopard. I thought I was being pretty thorough... I keep two SuperDuper! backups to two different external drives, both using "backup - all files" and "smart update".

I used the "erase and install" feature in Leopard because I've upgraded a lot of times and wanted to start clean. So the copies on those backup drives are all I have. I used the migration assistant to copy my data from one of the backup drives back to the iMac. I thought everything was in good shape until I tried to startup MySQL and found it missing. Upon further inspection it appears that /usr didn't make it onto either of the backups.

This isn't the catastrophe it could have been because all I use MySQL for is a searchable database of my email, which I can recreate easily enough. But still, it seems to me that "all files" should include /usr, should it not?

Did I do something wrong, or is this a bug? And how do I make sure /usr gets backed up from here on out?

Oh, SuperDuper! version is v2.5 (v84)

dnanian
07-13-2008, 10:44 PM
"Backup - all files" absolutely, positively includes /usr: there are tons of files in /usr, including many parts of OSX itself. Note, though, that it's quite unlikely that the migration assistant will bring in anything from /usr.

You can see exactly what we do not copy by examining the copy script...

janiner
07-13-2008, 11:17 PM
Ok, I took another look and I see what happened.

/usr *is* there, but it doesn't show up in the Finder window nor, apparently, is it included in searches from the Finder, because I searched for anything with mysql in the name and nothing came up.

What the Migration Assistant did was to create "/usr/local (from old Mac)" which has the files I was looking for. I just had to use Terminal to see it.

Sorry for the confusion... I guess sticking with the GUI is a mistake when trying to do sys admin tasks. I hate it when the OS tries to protect itself from me! :)

dnanian
07-14-2008, 07:31 AM
Ah, sorry, I should have mentioned that /usr would, of course, be hidden: most people who deal with it are in Terminal quite a bit and would access it from there. Glad you're all set.

klassa
11-13-2008, 07:59 AM
Ah, sorry, I should have mentioned that /usr would, of course, be hidden: most people who deal with it are in Terminal quite a bit and would access it from there. Glad you're all set.

Would SuperDuper! also not include "hidden" files in the counts that it shows to you, upon conclusion? I just did a backup and was told that it copied only 18 files, for example. And yet, it copied at least 30 files from /usr/local/pgsql alone...

So, I'm confused. :-)

Thanks.

dnanian
11-13-2008, 08:33 AM
No, those files would be counted. I've not seen the counts be off: are you sure the files weren't already there?

klassa
11-13-2008, 09:34 AM
No, those files would be counted. I've not seen the counts be off: are you sure the files weren't already there?

Reasonably sure, yeah. There's postgres activity on my box every day (as in, I insert about 10K records into a table). I only do a SuperDuper! backup of that box about once a month, though. So, most of the stuff in /usr/local/pgsql would be new/modified in that time period. Plus, I host a small web site that gets daily updates that are archived with a timestamp... And so, a few dozen of those would have been new, at the very least.

When I go to the backup, the stuff appears to be there. So, I think SD! is definitely copying it. I'll keep my eye on the count, the next time, and see if it looks off again. If so, maybe I can become a test subject. :-)

Thanks for the quick reply!