MacOS 12/13/14 - Carbon Copy Cloner 6 - Users Thread

[dai-leung]

Does this CCC's backup function equivalent to Chronosync's "bi-directional" sync"?

I have 2 folders, F1 and F2 with
F1: fi1enew(2024), file2(2023), file3(2020)
F2: file1(2023), file2new(2024), file3(2020)

2020, 2023 and 2024 are the creation dates of the files.

I backup'ed F1 to F2, then again F2 to F1 with the selection of "don't delete anything" and "don't update newer files on the destination".

After both backups, I have,
F1:fi1enew(2024), file2new(2024), file3(2020) and SafetyNet: file2(2023), file3(2020)
F2: fi1enew(2024), file2new(2024), file3(2020) and SafetyNet: file1(2023)

That is F1=F2 and both contain the latest files. And the SafetyNet contains the old files plus file3(2020) which is of the same date on the original F1 and F2.

Does this CCC backup operation syncs F1 and F2 and is equivalent to Chronosync's bi-dirctional sync and the SafetyNet is equivalent to the Chronosync's Archive?

 

[gilby101]

I have 2 folders, F1 and F2 with
F1: fi1enew(2024), file2(2023), file3(2020)
F2: file1(2023), file2new(2024), file3(2020)

2020, 2023 and 2024 are the creation dates of the files.

I backup'ed F1 to F2, then again F2 to F1 with the selection of "don't delete anything" and "don't update newer files on the destination".

After both backups, I have,
F1:fi1enew(2024), file2new(2024), file3(2020) and SafetyNet: file2(2023), file3(2020)
F2: fi1enew(2024), file2new(2024), file3(2020) and SafetyNet: file1(2023)

That is F1=F2 and both contain the latest files. And the SafetyNet contains the old files plus file3(2020) which is of the same date on the original F1 and F2.

Assuming that the "new" in your names is not really in file name, rather it is to emphasise that it is a newer version, then that looks right. There must be something about file3 which makes the F2 one the dominant version.

Does this CCC backup operation syncs F1 and F2 and is equivalent to Chronosync's bi-dirctional sync and the SafetyNet is equivalent to the Chronosync's Archive?

In both cases I would say "roughly equivalent" or "functionally similar". Bi-directional sync of folder is not a strength of CCC. If you need that, use CS. I will leave it at that, though I have views as to where each is stronger/better. There are other threads which discuss which product to use.

 

[dai-leung]

Your answer is exceedingly helpful to me! You are very responsive and generous with your time.

I only have folders to sync. It seems that CCC will do that for me. I did many syncing experiments using CCC and they didn’t work the way sync would. So I ask CCC if they could provide a feature “do not replace newer file at the destination”. They wrote back and said CCC has it and is under File Copying Settings/Troubleshooting Settings.
I tested it and you confirmed the result is correct.

I am still learning about CCC. Trying to learn another complicated software like ChronoSync will be beyond my ability.

 

[dai-leung]

CCC 7 beta: I have done many backups to generate snapshots using both CCC6 and CCC7. Results suggest that:

1) On a backup drive that has many CCC6 snapshots, CCC7 can continue to generate snapshots on this drive and does not affect the CCC6 snapshots;
2) the new CCC7 feature of allowing a snapshot to be saved, extends to all CCC6 snapshots on the drive described in (1)
3) when the mac is reverted back to CCC6 (using a snapshot), CCC6 can generate snapshots on the drive that has a mix of CCC6 and CCC7 snapshots, except the "save snapshot" feature is no longer available.

As far as snapshot is concerned, it seems safe to use CCC7 on a CCC6 backup drive and later convert back to CCC6 if so desired without affecting both the CCC6 and CCC7 snapshots that are on that drive.

It seems that the "save snapshot" feature also can be used on the TM drive (not 100% sure).

The following 2 pictures show this new "save snapshot" feature:



Another feature is to be able to write note on each backup task as shown below:

 

[dai-leung]

In both cases I would say "roughly equivalent" or "functionally similar". Bi-directional sync of folder is not a strength of CCC.

I did more tests and found that I could sync two folders and also archived the replaced files by doing backup F1-->F2, F2-->F1, then again F1-->F2, F2-->F1 (this step equalized the safetynet on F1 and F2.)

I remember from reading about migration assistant that it can also be used to migrate the contents from one mac to the next by connecting them together (I have never done this before). CCC allows me to select the Macintosh HD - Data either as the source or destination.

Am I correct that the CCC's sync function (if the method I found is correct) can also be used to sync two mac? I do understand that Chronosync is the go to software for sync. But if CCC also work, this may be an option for mac users who don't have Chronosync.

I read that Mr. Bombich said that CCC does not support sync, thus worry that I could be wrong. You are someone I respect, so just want to seek your opinion and confirmation if possible.

The folders I used are:
F1: f1(latest file in time), f2, f3, f4
F2: f1, f2(latest file in time), f3, f5
At the end, F1 and F2 each has 2 SatefyNets: the first one contains files replaced in the current folder and the second one, contains files replaced in the other folder.

 

[gilby101]

I remember from reading about migration assistant that it can also be used to migrate the contents from one mac to the next by connecting them together (I have never done this before).

Migration Assistant is a macOS feature which can use TM for system recovery or migration to a new Mac. A suitable configured CCC backup disk can be used in that way too. or CCC

CCC allows me to select the Macintosh HD - Data either as the source or destination.

CCC is very flexible, but requires much more understanding (and testing) than does Time Machine.

Am I correct that the CCC's sync function (if the method I found is correct) can also be used to sync two mac? I do understand that Chronosync is the go to software for sync. But if CCC also work, this may be an option for mac users who don't have Chronosync.

Complex products, like CCC, frequently expand on their core features. But this expansion is often into areas of functionality where other products are better. CCC is the 'top of the class' Mac backup and restore product. And like many other backup products can be used for synchronisation of folders on one Mac. Though you have got it working with CCC, I would not attempt to use CCC for reliable bi-directional sync and most definitely not between Macs.

Chronosync on one computer and Chronosync Agent on another do provide very fast, reliable bi-directional synchronisation. If you want to explore synchronisation try the free trial of CS and, for sync between Macs, its Agent.

 

[dai-leung]

Thank you for your response and explanation again. I don’t use 2 or multiple Macs thus will not be able to take advantage of what ChronoSync has to offer. Just curious, can it sync wirelessly?

I hope some members can use the CCC sync described above and see if it indeed work.

 

[gilby101]

Just curious, can it sync wirelessly?

Yes. Just needs to be on the same LAN.

 

[dai-leung]

Not over internet?

Even with LAN, I can see the advantage of syncing 2 macs using ChronoSync as oppose to using CCC. For ChronoSync, when one comes home from office, all he needs to do is to turn on the Mac. For CCC, he has to connect the 2 macs together. If he has to do it everyday, indeed it is a chore, better spend $50 to buy ChronoSync.

But for occasionally syncing 2 folders, CCC may be sufficient.

PS: you gave the correct answer: CCC does not allow creating snapshot faster than one per hour.

 

[dai-leung]

CCC7 new feature: vacation snapshots.

I enabled "CCC snapshots" on the Machintosh HD - Data volume and found that whenever I used CCC by hitting the "start" button or when it executed a scheduled backup, a snapshot would be created if the SafetyNet was off (and two snapshots were created if it was set to on). Currently, there seems to be no known way to transferred these snapshots on the data volume to the CCC backup external drive. I suspect that CCC have been able to create snapshot on the data volume just like Time Machine would (by turning on the automatic hourly backup). It then came up with the new idea: make it into vacation snapshots.

The vacation snapshots on the data volume do not interfere with the scheduled backups on the external drive if it is connected to the mac. When this is the case and when it is the scheduled time to do backup, two snapshots will be created, one on the data volume and one on the external drive.

 

[gilby101]

Not over internet?

For syncing folders between 2 (or more) Macs over the Internet you can use Resilio Sync. There are a few other alternatives.

I enabled "CCC snapshots" on the Machintosh HD - Data

There multiple uses of snapshots:
1) To create a consistent file system before backup. This is created on the source volume and is usually deleted when backup is complete. This is what CCC , CS, TM, etc. create on the source volume before backup and delete afterwards. This is the use on Macintosh HD - Data.
2) Snapshots on the TM or CCC destination volume which are kept forever (or until thinned).
3) CCC optionally creates SafetyNet snapshots - basically in case something goes wrong on the destination.

Take care clicking buttons in CCC until you know exactly what they mean. Do read the CCC documentation - all this is covered.

 

[flowrider]

I tried to use CCC Beta 7 for the first time this morning. I tried to clone my Sonoma boot disk. I had no luck. I removed CCC 7 and reinstalled CCC 6.1.10 and had no issues making the bootable clone. Has something changed in the procedure for CCC 7?

Lou

 

[Realityck]

I tried to use CCC Beta 7 for the first time this morning. I tried to clone my Sonoma boot disk. I had no luck. I removed CCC 7 and reinstalled CCC 6.1.10 and had no issues making the bootable clone. Has something changed in the procedure for CCC 7?

Lou

It should work the same. I erased the destination SSD with Disk Utility -> Erase Volume Group. Then I proceeded to use that external SSD as the new destination. Selected Bootable Copy Assistant as usual. Allow CCC to erase my SSD, and now it is cloning using the APFS replication of the file system. Completed successfully using MacOS 14.4.

 

[dai-leung]

Very useful and helpful result despite both CCC and Chronosync discouraged doing a bootable backup. CCC said that continue to do backups on this bootable volume might make it non-bootable. I hope this is not the case.

 

[RK78]

NO, sir. I use 1.2.1., the last one. I have asked several times to the OCLP an option to not auto install root patches.

It´s simple. You make a clean OCLP install. When done, revert the root patches. Boot without the root patches and then use Migration Assistant from the Utilities folder.
That easy.

I have done this a lot of times, with a lot of versions of OCLP, including the last one.

The screenshot you mention is just to recall you to install again the root patches. It´s an automatic prompt since last versions of OCLP.

Anyway, I prefere a bootable clone made with CCC. In case of any problem, I can simply boot from it and clone again to main drive. Migration Assistan is so much slower.

You replied some time ago here https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...unsupported-macs-thread.2346881/post-32970240 re. creating a bootable clone via Migration Assistant.

Just getting around to this now, and would like to be sure I understand this correctly. You say, "you make a clean OCLP install." According to that, I would create a new, empty APFS formatted volume, on an external drive, with sufficient space, then add to it the OpenCore-Patcher. app - in this case the 1.4.2. And after reverting root patches, move everything over from the current volume in use with Migration Assistant.

Nothing else to do, just that and it will be bootable?

Does that sound right? Thanks

EDIT: in case trifero doesn't see this for a while, anyone can feel free to respond.

 

[dai-leung]

Selected Bootable Copy Assistant as usual. Allow CCC to erase my SSD, and now it is cloning using the APFS replication of the file system. Completed successfully using MacOS 14.4

I am not a computer person. Hope to try your bootable drive method. Any chance of sharing step by step instructions?

 

[trifero]

You replied some time ago here https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...unsupported-macs-thread.2346881/post-32970240 re. creating a bootable clone via Migration Assistant.

Just getting around to this now, and would like to be sure I understand this correctly. You say, "you make a clean OCLP install." According to that, I would create a new, empty APFS formatted volume, on an external drive, with sufficient space, then add to it the OpenCore-Patcher. app - in this case the 1.4.2. And after reverting root patches, move everything over from the current volume in use with Migration Assistant.

Nothing else to do, just that and it will be bootable?

Does that sound right? Thanks

EDIT: in case trifero doesn't see this for a while, anyone can feel free to respond.

That´s right, but I always boot from that external drive connecting it as "internal" (from a ESATA port, in fact), but I suppose that there will be no proplem booting it from an USB port (Apple never supported officially booting from USB, though it works the inmese mayority of times)

Also, you can clone directly the OCLP installation if you have it, no need to make a clean install and then use Migration Assistant. Just the same, revert root patches and clone it. Once booted, reapply root patches.

 

[YatBob]

On my backup disk there is a directory MobileSoftwareUpdate, which searching does not tell me what this directory is for, is this something new or I just never noticed it before

 

[Realityck]

On my backup disk there is a directory MobileSoftwareUpdate, which searching does not tell me what this directory is for, is this something new or I just never noticed it before

Did you find the restore.log inside it?
restore.log is a long text file which is, in effect, the installer log. It normally contains a full account of every macOS install or update made in that system since the first install of MacOS 14 for example, so can be very large indeed.

 

[RK78]

Also, you can clone directly the OCLP installation if you have it, no need to make a clean install and then use Migration Assistant. Just the same, revert root patches and clone it. Once booted, reapply root patches.

Thanks trifero for the quick reply. Not sure I understand what you mean by,"you can clone directly the OCLP installation if you have it, no need to make a clean install and then use Migration Assistant"

"clone directly the OCLP installation" Please explain how to do this. Do you mean clone using CCC? I already have a CCC backup, but it's not directly bootable, unless using Legacy Bootable Copy Assistant.

 

[dai-leung]

clone directly the OCLP installation ….. I already have a CCC backup, but it's not directly bootable, unless using Legacy Bootable Copy Assistant

I have OCLP Sonoma. Is it possible to use CCC’s Legacy Bootable Copy Assistant to make a bootable OCLP Sonoma backup on an external drive? Your help would be appreciated.

 

[RK78]

I have OCLP Sonoma. Is it possible to use CCC’s Legacy Bootable Copy Assistant to make a bootable OCLP Sonoma backup on an external drive? Your help would be appreciated.

I'm probably not the right person to ask about this, since I'm running Ventura and have never yet tried Legacy Bootable Copy Assistant.

 

[dai-leung]

Thanks just the same! I sincerely hope that someone who has the expertise and experience could help or shed light on this matter.

 

[trifero]

Thanks trifero for the quick reply. Not sure I understand what you mean by,"you can clone directly the OCLP installation if you have it, no need to make a clean install and then use Migration Assistant"

"clone directly the OCLP installation" Please explain how to do this. Do you mean clone using CCC? I already have a CCC backup, but it's not directly bootable, unless using Legacy Bootable Copy Assistant.

That´s correct. Using the 4th and then second option. Don´t forget to uninstall first root patches. If not, it will give you error.

 

[YatBob]

Did you find the restore.log inside it?
restore.log is a long text file which is, in effect, the installer log. It normally contains a full account of every macOS install or update made in that system since the first install of MacOS 14 for example, so can be very large indeed.

yes I have the restore log, thanks for the explanation