From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

I just tried to restore an app from a time machine backup and discovered
it is marked as not executable. I checked other directories and none of
the apps are executable. I have two parallel time machine backups and
they are both the same. I'm sure the last time I had to restore an app
I was able to do so. What is going on?
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 10/5/20 5:41 PM, Robert Peirce wrote:

I just tried to restore an app from a time machine backup and discovered
it is marked as not executable.  I checked other directories and none of the apps are executable.  I have two parallel time machine backups and
they are both the same.  I'm sure the last time I had to restore an app
I was able to do so.  What is going on?

I back up my wife's computer to a sparsebundle, again in parallel. I
opened one of thes and they were all executable. This is very strange.

I'm going to try rebooting to see if that helps.
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 10/5/20 5:45 PM, Robert Peirce wrote:

I'm going to try rebooting to see if that helps.

No joy. This is bizarre. I stopped using SuperDuper! for backups
because I THOUGHT Time Machine would be more reliable.
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 10/5/20 5:45 PM, Robert Peirce wrote:

I back up my wife's computer to a sparsebundle, again in parallel.  I opened one of thes and they were all executable.  This is very strange.

Now my wife's is doing it on both drives. What is failing?
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 10/5/20 5:41 PM, Robert Peirce wrote:

I just tried to restore an app from a time machine backup and discovered
it is marked as not executable.  I checked other directories and none of the apps are executable.  I have two parallel time machine backups and
they are both the same.  I'm sure the last time I had to restore an app
I was able to do so.  What is going on?

Weirder and weirder. As a test I went into the backup and dragged an
app to the desktop. It became executable. I guess that's a good thing
in that restoring an app will probably result in an executable version,
but why don't they show up that way when I "enter" Time Machine or when
I actually go to the directory in the backup?
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 2020-10-05 22:47:37 +0000, Robert Peirce said:

On 10/5/20 5:41 PM, Robert Peirce wrote:

I just tried to restore an app from a time machine backup and
discovered it is marked as not executable.  I checked other directories
and none of the apps are executable.  I have two parallel time machine
backups and they are both the same.  I'm sure the last time I had to
restore an app I was able to do so.  What is going on?

Weirder and weirder. As a test I went into the backup and dragged an
app to the desktop. It became executable. I guess that's a good thing
in that restoring an app will probably result in an executable version,
but why don't they show up that way when I "enter" Time Machine or when
I actually go to the directory in the backup?

Probably because you cannot run the app directly from the Time Machine
backup. You need to first restore it to a "normal" drive.

Of course, restoring just the app itself may not work for the more
complicated software from the likes of Adobe, Microsoft, etc. that
sprinkle bits and pieces all over your system drive.


--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

In message <rlg3u8$1fcc$1@gioia.aioe.org> Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

I just tried to restore an app from a time machine backup and discovered
it is marked as not executable. I checked other directories and none of
the apps are executable. I have two parallel time machine backups and
they are both the same. I'm sure the last time I had to restore an app
I was able to do so. What is going on?

Did you use the Time Machine UI to restore the app, or did you manually
drag it from the backup drive?

--
"Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
"I think so, Larry, and um, Brain, but how can we get seven dwarves
to shave their legs?"
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 05-Oct-2020 at 2:49:40PM PDT, "Robert Peirce" <bob@peirce-family.com>
wrote:

On 10/5/20 5:45 PM, Robert Peirce wrote:

I'm going to try rebooting to see if that helps.

No joy. This is bizarre. I stopped using SuperDuper! for backups
because I THOUGHT Time Machine would be more reliable.

Nope. They are different, as you've discovered. TimeMachine takes a periodic snapshot of the file systems you've flagged in the TimeMachine Preferences, based on the Machine Name. You can use that snapshot history to travel back
in time to restore specific files or directories. You can also use it with newly installed version of the OS to migrate the system that's been backed up to the newly installed system. AFAIK, you cannot boot a TimeMachine volume either from a Timecapsule or an attached volume. I've never seen MacOS allow this.

SuperDuper! will produce a bootable clone of a drive if it has a bootable system on it. It will update the backup drive to be a clone of drive being backed up. It's a snapshot of the drive at the time of backup and contains no history you can wander around. Carbon Copy Cloner also backs up the recover partition or volume while SuperDuper! does not.

This is why I have both of these running. Periodically, I swap out my backup clone and TimeMachine disk. It has partitions that are clones of the running system and a TimeMachine backup.

A while ago, I added a third backup--a network copy of all files to BackBlaze. This is like a TimeMachine backup but you can't restore an entire system with migration. You need to restore from TimeMachine or a clone, then restore files from the remote site.

Time to audit your backup strategy. Sadly, your kind of failure is often because while you setup backups, you didn't test a full restore strategy.

Good luck.
--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...


--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 10/5/20 8:05 PM, Lewis wrote:

In message <rlg3u8$1fcc$1@gioia.aioe.org> Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

I just tried to restore an app from a time machine backup and discovered
it is marked as not executable. I checked other directories and none of
the apps are executable. I have two parallel time machine backups and
they are both the same. I'm sure the last time I had to restore an app
I was able to do so. What is going on?

Did you use the Time Machine UI to restore the app, or did you manually
drag it from the backup drive?

In this case I was using Time Machine to do the restore. However, I did
drag an app from the time machine directory tree and although it was
marked as unexecutable in the tree it became executable when I dragged
it to my desktop.
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 10/5/20 7:52 PM, Your Name wrote:

Probably because you cannot run the app directly from the Time Machine backup. You need to first restore it to a "normal" drive.

That sounds like a good reason. I would have thought TM would still
show that it was potentially an executable, but this may always have
been the case. The last time I restored an app I didn't really notice
how it was marked. I just restored it and it worked.
> Of course, restoring just the app itself may not work for the more

complicated software from the likes of Adobe, Microsoft, etc. that
sprinkle bits and pieces all over your system drive.

Needing to restore anything is pretty rare for me. Hopefully I will
never run into this.

Out of curiosity, if you use TM, how do apps show up there for you?

--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 2020-10-06 13:53:40 +0000, Robert Peirce said:

On 10/5/20 7:52 PM, Your Name wrote:

Probably because you cannot run the app directly from the Time Machine
backup. You need to first restore it to a "normal" drive.

That sounds like a good reason. I would have thought TM would still
show that it was potentially an executable, but this may always have
been the case. The last time I restored an app I didn't really notice
how it was marked. I just restored it and it worked.

Of course, restoring just the app itself may not work for the more
complicated software from the likes of Adobe, Microsoft, etc. that
sprinkle bits and pieces all over your system drive.

Needing to restore anything is pretty rare for me. Hopefully I will
never run into this.

Out of curiosity, if you use TM, how do apps show up there for you?

I don't use Time Machine because I don't like the way it works. I don't
want to keep multiple copies of the same slightly different files (same
reason I hate Apple's silly "Versions" which needs an 'off' switch!),
so it is extremely wasteful on disk space and a nuisance that it makes
a backup when it feels like it rather than when I want / need it to.

I use Carbon Copy Cloner. That only keeps what I need and I can backup
when I want. It is also bootable if anything goes wrong with the main
drive. Plus I easily dismount and detach the backup drives whenever I
want without Time Machine filling up my main drive with 'snapshots".


--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 06-Oct-2020 at 12:34:39PM PDT, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

On 2020-10-06 13:53:40 +0000, Robert Peirce said:

On 10/5/20 7:52 PM, Your Name wrote:

Probably because you cannot run the app directly from the Time Machine >>> backup. You need to first restore it to a "normal" drive.

That sounds like a good reason. I would have thought TM would still
show that it was potentially an executable, but this may always have
been the case. The last time I restored an app I didn't really notice
how it was marked. I just restored it and it worked.

Of course, restoring just the app itself may not work for the more
complicated software from the likes of Adobe, Microsoft, etc. that
sprinkle bits and pieces all over your system drive.

Needing to restore anything is pretty rare for me. Hopefully I will
never run into this.

Out of curiosity, if you use TM, how do apps show up there for you?

I don't use Time Machine because I don't like the way it works. I don't
want to keep multiple copies of the same slightly different files (same reason I hate Apple's silly "Versions" which needs an 'off' switch!),
so it is extremely wasteful on disk space and a nuisance that it makes
a backup when it feels like it rather than when I want / need it to.

I use Carbon Copy Cloner. That only keeps what I need and I can backup
when I want. It is also bootable if anything goes wrong with the main
drive. Plus I easily dismount and detach the backup drives whenever I
want without Time Machine filling up my main drive with 'snapshots".

Actually, you should google "file system snapshot" and read up on what that is and does. TimeMachine implemented a specialized file container and I'm guessing there's some sort of process that collects "files that have changed" on earlier versions of MacOS that pre-date APFS which has actual volume-level snapshots. These aren't copies of files. The first instance of a file being created is the only copy there is. After that, it's a hard link.

You've made a technology decision based on an non-technical basis. People do that all the time, like "I want that red convertible because it's looks cool." "But it's an Audi. God help you getting service outside of major metro areas and don't even think about driving it cross country."

Good luck with your Audi.
--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...


--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 2020-10-06 22:40:43 +0000, Percival John Hackworth said:

On 06-Oct-2020 at 12:34:39PM PDT, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

On 2020-10-06 13:53:40 +0000, Robert Peirce said:

On 10/5/20 7:52 PM, Your Name wrote:

Probably because you cannot run the app directly from the Time Machine >>>> backup. You need to first restore it to a "normal" drive.

That sounds like a good reason. I would have thought TM would still
show that it was potentially an executable, but this may always have
been the case. The last time I restored an app I didn't really notice
how it was marked. I just restored it and it worked.

Of course, restoring just the app itself may not work for the more
complicated software from the likes of Adobe, Microsoft, etc. that
sprinkle bits and pieces all over your system drive.

Needing to restore anything is pretty rare for me. Hopefully I will
never run into this.

Out of curiosity, if you use TM, how do apps show up there for you?

I don't use Time Machine because I don't like the way it works. I don't
want to keep multiple copies of the same slightly different files (same
reason I hate Apple's silly "Versions" which needs an 'off' switch!),
so it is extremely wasteful on disk space and a nuisance that it makes
a backup when it feels like it rather than when I want / need it to.

I use Carbon Copy Cloner. That only keeps what I need and I can backup
when I want. It is also bootable if anything goes wrong with the main
drive. Plus I easily dismount and detach the backup drives whenever I
want without Time Machine filling up my main drive with 'snapshots".

Actually, you should google "file system snapshot" and read up on what that is
and does. TimeMachine implemented a specialized file container and I'm guessing there's some sort of process that collects "files that have changed" on earlier versions of MacOS that pre-date APFS which has actual volume-level snapshots. These aren't copies of files. The first instance of a file being created is the only copy there is. After that, it's a hard link.

<snip>

I mean the multiple version copies of files that have been physically
been changed.

You have a spreadsheet saved, so Time Machine backs it up ... great.
You make a minor change and save it, so Time Machine makes a backup of
that changed file while also keeping the original unchanged file ...
that's why it's called "Time Machine", because you can step back in
time through the various alterated versions of files. That's why I also
detest the similar disk space wasting "Versions" forced on users of
Apple's own apps.

For *me* and the way I work, that is a completely pointless waste of
disk space, especially when working on large files like images, movies,
etc. I never want to go back to that orginal unchanged version. I only
ever need the current version backed up in case of the main disk dying.

For others of course, such a backup technique may well be useful.
Although there's also the issue that when Time Machine starts running
out of disk space for these multiple back up files, it simply begins
deleting the oldest files without asking, which to some degree makes it
rather pointless too because at some stage you can't go back to the
original file any longer anyway.


--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 2020-10-06 15:34, Your Name wrote:

On 2020-10-06 13:53:40 +0000, Robert Peirce said:

On 10/5/20 7:52 PM, Your Name wrote:

Probably because you cannot run the app directly from the Time
Machine backup. You need to first restore it to a "normal" drive.

That sounds like a good reason.  I would have thought TM would still
show that it was potentially an executable, but this may always have
been the case.  The last time I restored an app I didn't really notice
how it was marked.  I just restored it and it worked.

Of course, restoring just the app itself may not work for the more
complicated software from the likes of Adobe, Microsoft, etc. that
sprinkle bits and pieces all over your system drive.

Needing to restore anything is pretty rare for me.  Hopefully I will
never run into this.

Out of curiosity, if you use TM, how do apps show up there for you?

I don't use Time Machine because I don't like the way it works. I don't
want to keep multiple copies of the same slightly different files (same reason I hate Apple's silly "Versions" which needs an 'off' switch!), so
it is extremely wasteful on disk space and a nuisance that it makes a
backup when it feels like it rather than when I want / need it to.

You clearly don't understand it.


--
"...there are many humorous things in this world; among them the white
man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages."
-Samuel Clemens
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

In message <Kj%fH.361565$7vd.121416@fx35.iad> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:

On 2020-10-06 15:34, Your Name wrote:

I don't use Time Machine because I don't like the way it works. I don't
want to keep multiple copies of the same slightly different files (same
reason I hate Apple's silly "Versions" which needs an 'off' switch!), so
it is extremely wasteful on disk space and a nuisance that it makes a
backup when it feels like it rather than when I want / need it to.

You clearly don't understand it.

He has no idea how versions work either. Everything in his paragraph is completely wrong.


--
Growing up leads to growing old, and then to dying/And dying to me
don't sound like all that much fun.
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

On 2020-10-10 09:02:14 +0000, Lewis said:

In message <Kj%fH.361565$7vd.121416@fx35.iad> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:

On 2020-10-06 15:34, Your Name wrote:

I don't use Time Machine because I don't like the way it works. I don't
want to keep multiple copies of the same slightly different files (same
reason I hate Apple's silly "Versions" which needs an 'off' switch!), so >>> it is extremely wasteful on disk space and a nuisance that it makes a
backup when it feels like it rather than when I want / need it to.

You clearly don't understand it.

He has no idea how versions work either. Everything in his paragraph is completely wrong.

If that's what you want to believe. :-\


--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113