PDA

View Full Version : Naming Disks and Clone Drives


rayc325
06-12-2005, 09:11 PM
Dave, I think everyone would benefit from a discussion of how to name the internal and external hard drives when cloning. I looked thru the instructions but I am still a little confused about it myself. For example, when cloning from an internal hard drive to an external what should the external be named? Also when cloning back to a NEW internal drive that drive should be named ? I would like to name them both something different to tell them apart. So how about some basic rules? Thanks

dnanian
06-12-2005, 09:26 PM
Ray: it doesn't have anything to do with internal, external, or much of anything else.

The basic rule is this: if you plan on booting from a copy, and the original drive is going to be available, name the copy the same as the original (unless it's a safety clone).

There aren't really any exceptions.

The reason to do it: if you don't, aliases could resolve to the original drive, rather than to the copy. (If the original isn't available, it'll go to the copy, but if the original is, and the boot volume isn't named the same, the alias will go to the original volume instead of the new one.)

How's that sound -- reasonable/clear/etc?

rayc325
06-12-2005, 09:39 PM
a backup only then it is not as important. If I name them both "Mac HD" how do I tell them apart?

sorry to be a pain but I am doing this for my daughter who can't afford to lose her programs etc. She is a graphic design major and uses many different programs that would be a pain to reload if something happened. Thanks

dnanian
06-12-2005, 09:57 PM
Well, SuperDuper! won't let you copy to the boot drive, so you know if it's selectable it's the backup.

Also, if it's external (vs internal) it'll have the default FireWire icon, whereas the internal will look like a regular drive.

But, remember: you don't have to name it the same until you want to boot from it.

macfeller
06-13-2005, 11:51 PM
Few things:

As is, boot volume v.backup volume vis a vis safety is fine. But, when doing other volumes it is iffy. A more visual method of selecting drives would be less error prone. Say I am restoring a partition from a backed up image. Once mounted the image is xxxx1 and the internal partition is merely xxxx. ASSuming one kows the .1 means it's the external, all is well. Being forced to navigate to volumes would be more foolproof and no more time or mousing demandig. Yes! :-P I erased a full volume and copied a empty volume to it. Dumb. But I know I am so had a third backup (and do have four of everything). Just about every other backup app has a visual method (pretty much a Mac thing, no?). See Synk.

The icon thing doesn't hold true if you've changed them.

Put in bold the bit about naming as long as it is renamed before booting.

mf

dnanian
06-13-2005, 11:57 PM
I'm not sure I understand. Why would seeing the drives in Volumes (something Mac users aren't used to, because Volumes is hidden) be any clearer than a list of them in a pop-up?

macfeller
06-14-2005, 03:31 PM
Probably wouldn't help all that much. Some folks are more visual. In Synk, and IIRC both Tri-BACKUP and Synchronize Pro, when picking source and target, you are presented with a dialog window much like Finder, Sidebar and all. In the Sidebar are the mounted drives, internals first, followed by externals. That is, internals on top of the list and externals listed below the internals. Not much different from xxxx and xxxx.1, I agree, but a bit. I'm not sure I wouldn't have burned myself if I had had that little bit of extra visual input.

A bit later: It's a moo point since I just tried it with another external 2 partition drive and one of the partitions does show in Synk before the internals. Very wierd - not an alphabetical thing at all. I know it's not a size thing. Whatever.

Thanks again for a beautiful product. I have been wrestling with Tiger for weeks now on a couple or ornery machines and if it weren't for the error free way SD! does it's thing I'd be even more nuts than I am now.

And, I hope your well honed sense of humor got the "moo" reference. :D

dnanian
06-14-2005, 03:47 PM
It's an interesting problem, because there are no standard "drive pickers" on the Mac. The only example of one I can think of is the one in Installer, and I don't think that'd help much at all.

Additional information in there might help -- size and such -- and while we could do that we consciously didn't to try to make things as simple as possible in the listing.

Of course, there's also drag and drop, where we force you to drag things in from the Finder, like Disk Utility itself. I find that incredibly counter-intuitive and obscure (and reviewed all this stuff with one of Apple's UI guys just a few days ago, and he agreed).

There are always things to improve, of course. And we're always taking notes about what people are suggesting or having trouble with. We'll continue to try to improve things as time goes on...

macfeller
06-14-2005, 09:58 PM
The size thing would do it for me. It's how I discriminate drives in MenuMeters and DiskWarrior.

dnanian
06-14-2005, 10:09 PM
(Yeah, although most people size the backup and original the same... it's a tough call. We're still looking...)

macfeller
06-14-2005, 10:14 PM
Heh. For me. I got so burned yesterday, and almost irrevocably so, I doubt I'll screw it up again. Well, not any time soon.

dnanian
06-14-2005, 10:19 PM
Yeah: I'm sorry that you had such trouble. How exactly did it happen?

macfeller
06-14-2005, 10:34 PM
Tired. Frustrated with intermitently bad logic board on one machine, fading drive on another - all the while going back and forth with Tiger (something in my Users' folder doesn't like Tiger). Anyway, I simply copied xxxx to xxxx.1 (erasing before copy - very long story why) when I should have been going the other way. I ripped out the firewire cable but was too late. No biggie (THIS TIME) because I know I screw up too much and had a third backup. Just a PITA.

As for size, yeah, actually, my images are indeed the same size - my external drive for daily SmartUpdates is a bit smaller.

Forget I ever brought it up. Thanks for everything.

dnanian
06-15-2005, 10:48 AM
It's hard to know how to "save" the user from making mistakes in all cases, unfortunately: but it's great to have > 1 backup in situations like this!

Timmy
08-23-2005, 04:45 PM
The basic rule is this: if you plan on booting from a copy, and the original drive is going to be available, name the copy the same as the original (unless it's a safety clone).


But, remember: you don't have to name it the same until you want to boot from it.

So, at the time that the cloning takes place the target volume can be named anything.

If we ever need to boot from that volume later in a situation where the original source volume is also present we can just rename the cloned volume from within the Finder to be the same as the other volume.

What about in a scenario where we would be booting from the clone and then immediately running SD to erase/restore ('reverse clone') to the original volume?
Should the drives be named the same or would it not matter?

Thanks.

dnanian
08-23-2005, 04:50 PM
That's right... if you can get to it in the Finder, of course!

With the reverse, you'd want the backup to be named the same as the original, restored to the original drive name. That's the best way, at least...!

Timmy
08-23-2005, 06:52 PM
That's right... if you can get to it in the Finder, of course!


Not sure what you mean by that..
Even if the primary boot volume is hosed we could still boot from the clone and rename it to match, right?


With the reverse, you'd want the backup to be named the same as the original, restored to the original drive name. That's the best way, at least...!

I keep two full clones on two different drives. Currently the clone volumes are named "Backup1" and "Backup2". It sounds like I should rename them to match my source volume...

The clones would mainly be used to to a full restore back to the main drive in the event of a major system problem.
Of course occasionally I need to mount the drive and grab a single file.
And sometimes I need to boot from the clone and work from it for a little while.

This seems to point towards the 'same name' concept, rather than the Backup1/Backup2 that i have been using...

dnanian
08-23-2005, 07:24 PM
Well, you can see if it makes a difference for you, actually. It might not, especially if you hold down Shift when you boot, because any applications that have this problem wouldn't run, and as long as the original volume is named properly, you'll be OK.

Again, the main issue here is applications that store aliases that might resolve to the original drive. If the original drive isn't there, it's not a problem, because the aliases will "fix themselves" if they can't find the original file.

But -- if the applications that make reference this way don't start, the aliases don't try to resolve, and the problems don't occur. See what I mean?