I am planning to do a manual migration and will thusly have to transfer a lot of data. This may seem silly but is there a better way than just using the Finder? I remember using the Terminal a long time ago for something like this, but I've forgotten why I did that. Do some bash commands offer more reliable copying (doing checks or something like that)?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Others may disagree, but it's been many years since I felt a need to use Terminal rather than Finder for a typical file copy job. That said, where are you moving the data? I.e., are you copying direct to another Mac via Target Disk Mode, an external drive, a network share via SMB or some other protocol? And what approximate volume of data?
If I were trying to move multiple gigabytes over SMB, I might use Terminal or CyberDuck and SSH/SFTP instead. It'll be much faster and less prone to failure. Otherwise, I feel like Finder is probably sufficient.
If I were trying to move multiple gigabytes over SMB, I might use Terminal or CyberDuck and SSH/SFTP instead. It'll be much faster and less prone to failure. Otherwise, I feel like Finder is probably sufficient.
Yeah, I might be paranoid and/or overthinking this....
I will just be removing the internal SSD from my old Mac Pro and putting it into an external enclosure attached to the Mac Studio in order to copy about 1TB worth of data.
That being the case, I'd probably go with it using Finder. If it fails or something, you could always fall back to Terminal, but personally I would trust modern Finder.app with that.
Just use the finder.
BUT... don't try to copy "too much at once".
This is a good way to run into problems.
Limit the copies into "smaller blocks" (and keep notes).
Reason why:
If there happens to be a "bad" (corrupted) file in a block of files you copy via the finder, the finder will just "quit" the copy (nothing copied), without telling you why (i.e., which file is bad and aborted the process).
Keep the blocks smaller and more manageable, and if you have a situation like this you can "work your way around it" more easily.
BUT... don't try to copy "too much at once".
This is a good way to run into problems.
Limit the copies into "smaller blocks" (and keep notes).
Reason why:
If there happens to be a "bad" (corrupted) file in a block of files you copy via the finder, the finder will just "quit" the copy (nothing copied), without telling you why (i.e., which file is bad and aborted the process).
Keep the blocks smaller and more manageable, and if you have a situation like this you can "work your way around it" more easily.
If you are moving a lot of data and want to be able to quickly recover / restart without everything having to copy again if a fail occurs ... prob best of using rsync from terminal. You'll want to update rsync to a newer version as compared to the older version that is included with MacOS for some reason.
- Install HomeBrew - https://brew.sh (for details see link) -- other wise just issue the following command from Terminal: /bin/bash -c "$(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Homebrew/install/HEAD/install.sh)"
- Once HomeBrew is installed - keep and eye on recommendation(s) made at the end of the install steps if you need to modify .zshrc file
- In Terminal type in the following (check to see existing built in version of rsync): rsync --version
- If above is below 3.2.3 do the following from Terminal: brew install rsync
- Exit Terminal session
- Start a new Terminal Session and type in: rsync --version
- Should see something like 3.2.3 or greater
- From Terminal you can now use rsync to copy folder(s) / file(s) via the following command:
- sudo rsync -vaE --progress "/SourceDirectory/" "/TargetDirectory/"
As I recall, the Mac app Carbon Copy Cloner uses 'rsync' to perform its file-copying. So simply using CCC will end up using 'rsync', without needing to use the command-line or HomeBrew.
Even if CCC doesn't use rsync, I think it still provides the option of continuing a copy operation when there's an error, rather than stopping like Finder does. When it reaches the end, you can then review all the errors.
Even if CCC doesn't use rsync, I think it still provides the option of continuing a copy operation when there's an error, rather than stopping like Finder does. When it reaches the end, you can then review all the errors.
My recollection also says 100 % you are correct re: CCC using rsync behind the scenes. Actually CCC would probably be the best option if one has it and doesn't want to mess around with Terminal / Homebrew / etc.
I do use both CCC and the Terminal. For something like this, where I don't want to clone a whole disk, just copy specific user content, using rsync seems more transparent to me. Also, I plan on installing homebrew anyhow. But in the end I might just use the Finder for this to keep it simple.
Either way, your input has helped me a lot in double checking my strategy and I now know what my options are and that I haven't missed anything obvious. Thanks!
Either way, your input has helped me a lot in double checking my strategy and I now know what my options are and that I haven't missed anything obvious. Thanks!
CCC lets you select a folder as the source, not just a whole disk.
bombich.com
Folder-to-Folder Backups | Bombich Software
I moved 500GB of data and used Forklift. The advantage with Forklift is that you can pause the copy/move and you also see the actual speed. You can select all the folders that you want to move, then individually pause the data copy per folder and allow one folder to me moved at a time. Or you can let them move all at the same time, but it will be a bit slower. It is way easier than Terminal.
CCC can easily copy just a folder and its contents and subdirectories