Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > uk.comp.sys.mac > #180030 > unrolled thread
| Started by | D.M. Procida <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-01-11 09:18 +0000 |
| Last post | 2025-01-12 23:05 +0000 |
| Articles | 5 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to uk.comp.sys.mac
Temporarily ignore Time Machine destination D.M. Procida <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> - 2025-01-11 09:18 +0000
Re: Temporarily ignore Time Machine destination Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2025-01-11 10:10 +0000
Re: Temporarily ignore Time Machine destination D.M. Procida <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> - 2025-01-11 11:49 +0000
Re: Temporarily ignore Time Machine destination TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> - 2025-01-11 13:40 +0000
Re: Temporarily ignore Time Machine destination Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> - 2025-01-12 23:05 +0000
| From | D.M. Procida <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-11 09:18 +0000 |
| Subject | Temporarily ignore Time Machine destination |
| Message-ID | <luerbuFj438U1@mid.individual.net> |
Sometimes I want Time Machine to ignore a certain destination for a few weeks (while I'm away, for example) so that it doesn't waste time trying to use it, and I don't get spurious warnings. There's no concept for this exposed in the Time Machine settings interface - what's the best way to achieve it? Daniele
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-11 10:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lueucfFjjccU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #180030 |
On 11 Jan 2025 at 09:18:54 GMT, "D.M. Procida"
<daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> wrote:
> Sometimes I want Time Machine to ignore a certain destination for a few weeks
> (while I'm away, for example) so that it doesn't waste time trying to use it,
> and I don't get spurious warnings.
>
> There's no concept for this exposed in the Time Machine settings interface -
> what's the best way to achieve it?
>
> Daniele
As far as I know, nothing other than removing it from TM settings then
adding it back again later.
It's quite tedious, I'm so bored of the TM icon lying that I'm not
backed up, and Apple ignoring my annual new-macOS bug reports about it
for the last decade.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
I hope I live long enough
to vindicate my pessimism
-- http://www.boasas.com/?c=1108
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D.M. Procida <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-11 11:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <luf46mFkghpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #180031 |
On 11 Jan 2025 at 10:10:23 GMT, "Jaimie Vandenbergh" <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> wrote: > On 11 Jan 2025 at 09:18:54 GMT, "D.M. Procida" > <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> wrote: > >> Sometimes I want Time Machine to ignore a certain destination for a few weeks >> (while I'm away, for example) so that it doesn't waste time trying to use it, >> and I don't get spurious warnings. >> >> There's no concept for this exposed in the Time Machine settings interface - >> what's the best way to achieve it? > As far as I know, nothing other than removing it from TM settings then > adding it back again later. Did you ever run into an issue where it would refuse to acknowledge the forgotten backup when you tried to do that? > It's quite tedious, I'm so bored of the TM icon lying that I'm not > backed up, and Apple ignoring my annual new-macOS bug reports about it > for the last decade. The whole Time Machine machinery itself seems to have been forgotten by Apple. They got it fundamentally working about 15 years ago, and seem to have decided: good enough, let's leave it like that. Daniele
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-11 13:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lufalrFlhqpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #180033 |
On 11 Jan 2025 at 11:49:42 GMT, "D.M. Procida" <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> wrote: > The whole Time Machine machinery itself seems to have been forgotten by Apple. > They got it fundamentally working about 15 years ago, and seem to have > decided: good enough, let's leave it like that. You sure? It seems to me they've removed the ability to restore to your chosen spot and also gone in for snapshots (full backups) every time instead of incremental backups made to look like full ones by a clever use of hard links. -- Tim
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-12 23:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <luj05mF9727U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #180033 |
On 11 Jan 2025 at 11:49:42 GMT, "D.M. Procida"
<daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2025 at 10:10:23 GMT, "Jaimie Vandenbergh"
> <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11 Jan 2025 at 09:18:54 GMT, "D.M. Procida"
>> <daniele-at-vurt-dot-org@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sometimes I want Time Machine to ignore a certain destination for a few weeks
>>> (while I'm away, for example) so that it doesn't waste time trying to use it,
>>> and I don't get spurious warnings.
>>>
>>> There's no concept for this exposed in the Time Machine settings interface -
>>> what's the best way to achieve it?
>
>> As far as I know, nothing other than removing it from TM settings then
>> adding it back again later.
>
> Did you ever run into an issue where it would refuse to acknowledge the
> forgotten backup when you tried to do that?
I think perhaps once? Not recently, maybe five years back.
>> It's quite tedious, I'm so bored of the TM icon lying that I'm not
>> backed up, and Apple ignoring my annual new-macOS bug reports about it
>> for the last decade.
>
> The whole Time Machine machinery itself seems to have been forgotten by Apple.
> They got it fundamentally working about 15 years ago, and seem to have
> decided: good enough, let's leave it like that.
They did the "okay so obviously we wrote TM originally to use ZFS
snapshots then didn't do ZFS so had to do it the hard way with directory
hardlinks; but now we have APFS snapshots so we can finally use
snapshots yaaaay" a few years back. Requires starting a new backup
though, so it can format the destination to APFS.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
...there should be a feature added to the RAID 0 standard
stating that if anyone selects RAID 0 as an option, they
must type in, "I know what I am doing and that it is wrong" before they can proceed.
- Archangel Mychael, ArsTechnica comments
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | uk.comp.sys.mac
csiph-web