![]() ![]() The major change is not long after I wrote this Mozy changed their business model and was no longer unlimited. What is the logic here? Is it really that much effort to back this up? Too much space used if you back this up? I wonder how Mozy fares in this test.**UPDATE - August 22, 2015: This post is pretty old, but the basics hold true. Examples of other things that get lost: whether or not a file extension is hidden, creation dates, modify dates, symlinks, if a downloaded file hasn’t been opened yet (quarantined), finder comments and where you downloaded an item from. No basic permissions? No timestamps? And no extended attributes? Wow, this means restores from BackBlaze will only get your data back and that you loose all of the hidden data on your files… What does this mean? Well, for example if you have a file that is locked and you restore it, the new file won’t be locked. Test dir '/Users/volz/Downloads/Src/95-devices' does not exist Test dir '/Users/volz/Downloads/Src/90-fifo' does not exist dir-with-flags: stat: No such file or directory bbouncer verify -d /Volumes/Src ~volz/Downloads/Src Last night I did some testing on BackBlaze with backup-bouncer v0.2.0 to see how well it was preserving the extra meta-data HFS+ is capable of storing. Tags: backblaze, backup, hfs+, mac os x, spideroak Combine this with the password issues I’ve mentioned previously and it looks like SpiderOak still has a ways to go before I can seriously consider using it to house my data. FAIL (Important)Īs you can see, SpiderOak fails all of the backup-bouncer tests. symlink1: stat: No such file or directory As with BackBlaze I did some testing with Backup Bouncer v0.2.0 to see how the latest version of SpiderOak (v) fairs with the meta-data that Mac OS X generates. However, I keep finding problems that prevent me from using it as my primary backup software. The ability to share files in your cloud with others.Whole cloud de-duplication – All of the data you backup to spideroak, regardless of the source is de-duplicated.I really want to like SpiderOak, especially when you consider the following features: Posted in Computers, MacOSX | Comments Off on Snow Leopard svn problems Tags: homebrew, mac os x, macports, subversion After the re-install everything looks like it’s back to normal! So, if you are having this issue and don’t want to use a newer version, grab the 10.3.2 combo update and Pacifist and go to town.įYI the binaries and libraries for subversion include: Before I did this I checked the other OS X update receipts to see if the subversion binaries or libraries have been modified since the 10.6.2 update and found they hadn’t. After a little while I decided to have Pacifist re-install the svn binaries and libraries from the update to see if it fixed the problem. This didn’t make sense because clearly something was wrong with one of the libraries or binaries for subversion. ![]() Using Pacifist I opened the installer package and had it verify that the svn binaries and libraries were all alright and they all passed with out a complaint. ![]() That sounds like a horrible idea since I’m no longer running 10.6.2 and who knows what that would break down the road, but I went ahead and downloaded the update to look at the contents. I found this nice article that suggested re-installing the 10.6.2 Combo update would resolve the problem. However, today I decided to revisit this and actually try to solve it since I was moving from macports to homebrew. I did some basic googling and decided the easiest solution was to install a newer version from macports. Svn: Mismatched RA version for 'neon': found 1.6.2, expected 1.6.5 A month or so ago I noticed that when I ran ‘svn –version’ I would get this: ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |