Mailing Lists: Apple Mailing Lists

Image of Mac OS face in stamp
 
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

OT: Cloning OS X



Have you looked at SuperDuper? I use it to create a bootable backup every day. It's not free, but it's not expensive either, and it is easy.

http://www.shirt-pocket.com/SuperDuper/SuperDuperDescription.html

Rob

On Sep 8, 2008, at 18:54, Rob Ross wrote:

What's the easiest way to clone a boot partition? It the OS 9 days you could just copy the system folder to another volume and then that volume was bootable. Obviously there's more going on with OS X and it's not so easy any more. But I've tried using Disk Copy to create a DMG file, copy all the System and Library folders to it, but then I could not find a way to boot into that DMG file.

I would really like to learn the secret of making a quick copy of a bootable volume again.

Rob Ross, Lead Software Engineer
E! Networks

---------------------------------------------------
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master." -- Commissioner Pravin Lal




On Sep 8, 2008, at 6:02 PM, Greg Guerin wrote:

Robert Koberg wrote:

You must spend a lot of time rebooting.

Nope.

Why not just buy multiple machines for your testing purposes?

I do have multiple machines. But I also have more bootable configs than machines, hence the partitions.



Is it legal to install the same version of OS X on two different partitions? (I really don't know)

Each machine came with an OS and has a separate license. The older machines have a series of upgraded OS licenses. The newer machines won't run older OS versions anyway, so it's moot for them. And the really old machines won't run the newer OS versions, so that's moot for them.


As to duplicated installs of the same licensed OS on a single machine, I see no legal problems. The license basically says it's tied to the hardware. I'm also allowed to make backup copies, and frankly, that's how the replicas get used: potentially discardable backup copies. Since no single machine can boot multiple partitions at once, there's never a question of having multiple concurrent running versions of the same license. If in doubt, consult your own legal counsel.

To me, it's about the same as virtualized bootable installs, just not as virtualized.


Are you a professional beta tester?

No, but sometimes it seems that way.

There are times when I have to test a new release (OS, Java, whatever) and I don't want to compromise the existing install. So I clone the known-good install to a spare partition, install the new release there, then boot on that. Assuming the entire disk doesn't get compromised (yeah, it's happened, so backups are also wise), this approach lets me test the new release but still revert back without having to restore from a backup, do a re-install, etc. I just choose the older startup partition and restart. If the new one works, then I might keep it active, or even migrate to it. If it doesn't work, then I can kill it and revert back to the known-good install without ever having to think about how to un- install anything.

There are other times when I have to go backwards in testing, and run a new version of an app under an old OS or JVM version, to ensure it's still compatible, or to check that a new work-around is indeed working around a bug in that old OS or JVM. So just because a partition becomes outdated doesn't necessarily mean it's useless.

Situations like this come up regularly enough that I have found it useful to maintain these multiple bootable partitions. It's what I've found works best for me for getting my work done, where "best" means my choice of a balance between cash outlay, equipment upgrades, equipment additions, equipment retirement, and me performing installs of older or newer software. I think the alternatives are worse. So compared to the other alternatives, yes, this is how I want to do it. If the question is whether it would be better to have bug-free software releases I can rely on without having to vet them first, then no, multiple partitions is not how I want to do it. But until the day when all software releases everywhere are bug-free on all possible configurations, I think I'll keep doing it this way.

I should also say that I've been doing things this way for years, since long before Mac OS 10.0 was released. I have a stack of old SCSI drives with much older Mac OS versions on them, back when 512 MB of mass-storage wasn't a little card you stuck in a digital camera. Some day I may weld some eye-bolts on some of those drives and use them as boat-anchors. Right now, most are stacked in my closet, but two are used to hold up a shelf, and one is a doorstop. Always check mass and dimensions first, as YMMV.

 -- GG

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Java-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/java-dev/email@hidden

This email sent to email@hidden
References: 
 >Re: Google Chrome and Java (From: Greg Guerin <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Google Chrome and Java (From: Rob Ross <email@hidden>)



Visit the Apple Store online or at retail locations.
1-800-MY-APPLE

Contact Apple | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2007 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.