 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like my work? Check out HexaLex, my game for iPhone & iPod Touch. It's a crossword game like Scrabble, but played with hexagonal tiles. http://www.hexalex.com Oh Mama! Another Backup Bouncer post! You might think that I, the author of Backup Bouncer, the crusader for end-user verification of backup tools, would have run BB on Time Machine at some point. If so, you have seriously underestimated my laziness. But this morning I got an e-mail from a user asking for help testing TM with BB, and this finally spurred me to do the test myself. Here’s how you test Time Machine with Backup Bouncer: $ mkdir ~/bb # We need to trick BB into thinking this is a volume it created $ touch ~/bb/bbouncer-vol $ sudo bbouncer create ~/bb # Now do a Time Machine backup and wait till it's done $ mv ~/bb ~/bb-orig # Now restore the ~/bb directory from Time Machine. # Try not to catch SPACE MADNESS!!! $ bbouncer verify -d ~/bb-orig ~/bb On my Leopard 10.5.3 machine here’s what I get with BB 0.1.3: Verifying: basic-permissions ... ok (Critical) Verifying: timestamps ... ok (Critical) Verifying: symlinks ... ok (Critical) Verifying: symlink-ownership ... FAIL Verifying: hardlinks ... FAIL (Important) Verifying: resource-forks ... Sub-test: on files ... ok (Critical) Sub-test: on hardlinked files ... FAIL (Important) Verifying: finder-flags ... ok (Critical) Verifying: finder-locks ... ok Verifying: creation-date ... ok Verifying: bsd-flags ... FAIL Verifying: extended-attrs ... Sub-test: on files ... ok (Important) Sub-test: on directories ... ok (Important) Sub-test: on symlinks ... ok Verifying: access-control-lists ... Sub-test: on files ... ok (Important) Sub-test: on dirs ... ok (Important) Verifying: fifo ... FAIL Verifying: devices ... FAIL Verifying: combo-tests ... Sub-test: xattrs + rsrc forks ... ok Sub-test: lots of metadata ... ok The only annoyance is that hardlinks aren’t preserved, but that’s not surprising considering the way hardlinks are used internally by TM to prevent wasted space. (I should point out that the hardlink failure here is not the same as the Apple rsync one I mentioned earlier today, and it’s not nearly as bad.) These results are not perfect but I would have no problem recommending TM backups to any less-than-hardcore user.
|
|
 |
 |
Hey, currently testing online backup services (only mozy and backblaze cause they allow monthly payment and are the only ones with affordable prices)
This is backblaze:
./bbouncer verify ~/bb ~/bb-backblaze
Verifying: basic-permissions … FAIL (Critical)
Verifying: timestamps … FAIL (Critical)
Verifying: symlinks … stat: ./symlink1: stat: No such file or directory
FAIL (Critical)
Verifying: symlink-ownership … FAIL
Verifying: hardlinks … FAIL (Important)
Verifying: resource-forks … FAIL (Critical)
Verifying: finder-flags … FAIL (Critical)
Verifying: finder-locks … FAIL
Verifying: creation-date … FAIL
Verifying: bsd-flags … ls: ./dir-with-flags: No such file or directory
FAIL
Verifying: extended-attrs … FAIL (Important)
Verifying: access-control-lists … ls: ./acl-test-dir: No such file or directory
FAIL (Important)
Test dir ‘/Users/florian/bb-backblaze/90-fifo’ does not exist
Test dir ‘/Users/florian/bb-backblaze/95-devices’ does not exist
Verifying: combo-tests … FAIL
Not too good, although I didn’t expect it to pass most tests, because it is not meant for bare metal restore or anything like that (for example it will backup Library but not most other System directories) but I’d say it should at least support xattrs and retain dates etc.