Re: Time Machine on a multi-user Mac

In article <2008032411135275249%not@dotcom>,
thepixelfreak <> wrote:

> > How do you safely remove an external drive if no one is logged in
> > to the system?
>
> Huh?

To safely remove an external drive, you should unmount the drive before
removing it. You can't unmount it if no one is logged in, and the
system is running.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

In article <2008032510160216807%not@dotcom>,
thepixelfreak <> wrote:

> As I've said, on TIGER, 10.4.11, the drives (any drive other than the
> boot drive) are unmounted on logout. So, as I tried to explain to
> that moron Lewis, the drive is already unmounted, as such, pulling
> the connector *IS SAFE*.

Why should anyone believe you? Lewis and I have our differences, both
politically and about some aspects of the Macintosh, but overall, he has
shown himself to be very knowledgeable about the hardware and the OS.
You, on the other hand, are an unknown element. What are your
credentials?

> Jesus, how hard is this for people to understand. Just try it. ssh
> into your machine when logged out and you will only see the boot
> volume.

How am I supposed to do that with only one computer?

> Every single instance of UNIX I've ever used (and I've used a lot of
> them, NeXTStep included) make no assumptions about people being
> logged in or not when it comes to mount points. This is abnormal
> behavior for a unix variant like MacOS X.

It doesn't work as you want it to, so it's abnormal?

> My suspicion is that OS X server _does not_ have this spectacular
> fault. But why should I have to pay 500 bucks just to have drives not
> unmount when I log out so my NFS exports still work to the machines I
> am logged in to?

Seems like a silly reason to buy server software in the first place,
regardless.

The bottom line is that since it takes only a few minutes for an
incremental backup, this is no big hardship. One could easily force a
backup just before logging off if it's that critical.

In other words, you're making a mountain out of a molehill, whether or
not external drives are unmounted when no one is logged in.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

In article <tomstiller->,
Tom Stiller <> wrote:

> In Tiger, it is possible to keep drives mounted on logout by making
> the proper entry in
> '/Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/autodiskmount' (e.g.
> AutomountDisksWithoutUserLogin -bool true). I don't know if this
> works in Leopard or not.

I just checked. It's the same in Leopard.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

In article <2008032512310075249%not@dotcom>,
thepixelfreak <> wrote:

> My beef isn't with Time-Machine per se (I don't use Leopard). It's to
> do with the drives not being mounted w/o a user logged into a
> graphical terminal session.

Big deal.

> > In other words, you're making a mountain out of a molehill, whether
> > or not external drives are unmounted when no one is logged in.
>
> Not in the unix world. It's the default behavior.

Guess what? This is the Macintosh world, not the generic unix world,
even though Mac OS X has unix underpinnings.

> At a minimum the mount behavior should be added, say to the disk
> utility, as an option for external/additional drives.

At a minimum, nothing needs to be done; the number of people who have
requested this can be counted on the fingers of one hand, if three
fingers have been amputated.

As I said, mountain and molehill.

> Whether or not it will fix the Time Machine flaw will have to be
> seen.

Whether or not this is a flaw is a matter of opinion at best.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

In article <michelle->, Michelle
Steiner <> wrote:

> In article <2008032510160216807%not@dotcom>,
> thepixelfreak <> wrote:
>
> > As I've said, on TIGER, 10.4.11, the drives (any drive other than the
> > boot drive) are unmounted on logout. So, as I tried to explain to
> > that moron Lewis, the drive is already unmounted, as such, pulling
> > the connector *IS SAFE*.
>
> Why should anyone believe you? Lewis and I have our differences, both
> politically and about some aspects of the Macintosh, but overall, he has
> shown himself to be very knowledgeable about the hardware and the OS.
> You, on the other hand, are an unknown element. What are your
> credentials?

a few people have confirmed the behaviour in this thread.

> > Jesus, how hard is this for people to understand. Just try it. ssh
> > into your machine when logged out and you will only see the boot
> > volume.
>
> How am I supposed to do that with only one computer?

so you can't actually disprove what he says, yet you do so anyway?

invite a friend over and have them bring a computer. it need not be a
mac -- just something with ssh or the ability to see shared drives.
there's even ssh for the iphone (although it requires jailbreak at this
time), and i recall that you have one of those, so you could even do it
yourself.

> > Every single instance of UNIX I've ever used (and I've used a lot of
> > them, NeXTStep included) make no assumptions about people being
> > logged in or not when it comes to mount points. This is abnormal
> > behavior for a unix variant like MacOS X.
>
> It doesn't work as you want it to, so it's abnormal?

abnormal: deviating from the normal or average
<http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-b...ctionary&va=ab
normal>

if this attribute of osx is different from all other unix systems, then
yes, it is 'abnormal.'

whether it's preferable or not is a separate issue. panther, if i
recall, didn't unmount drives on logout. i don't remember the
reasoning apple gave for the change, but i'm sure google can find it.
i do remember people bitching about which way was 'better.'

> The bottom line is that since it takes only a few minutes for an
> incremental backup, this is no big hardship. One could easily force a
> backup just before logging off if it's that critical.

that depends on how many files get changed and how big they are. for
someone who works with large graphics or video files, or has vmware
disk images (~5+ gig or more a piece), even a few changed files might
produce a lengthy backup.

> In other words, you're making a mountain out of a molehill, whether or
> not external drives are unmounted when no one is logged in.

it's actually an issue for some people. why is this so hard to accept?

In article
<jollyroger->,
Jolly Roger <> wrote:

> > > My beef isn't with Time-Machine per se (I don't use Leopard).
> > > It's to do with the drives not being mounted w/o a user logged
> > > into a graphical terminal session.
> >
> > Big deal.
>
> My goodness, Michelle. I mean really. Stop trying to pick fights
> about issues you clearly have little interest in to begin with. If
> you don't care about the topic at hand, don't comment on it!

Sorry, but when someone goes hyper about a minor issue, it gets my
dander up, and I react. I really am trying to work on it, but it ain't
easy. If he had not called Lewis a moron, I probably wouldn't have
reacted.

> > At a minimum, nothing needs to be done; the number of people who
> > have requested this can be counted on the fingers of one hand, if
> > three fingers have been amputated.
>
> Really? And you know this how? Where's the data to back up that
> wild-ass assertion? For all you know, thousands of previous Unix
> users have requested Apple change this.

Hey, I was using a bit of hyperbole there. Anyway, my comment is valid
for this newsgroup; only two people have requested it here. Not that
requesting it here would do any good.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

In article <250320081443309900%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone. ca>,
Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote:

> > Hey, I was using a bit of hyperbole there. Anyway, my comment is
> > valid for this newsgroup; only two people have requested it here.
> > Not that requesting it here would do any good.
>
> You always have an excuse, don't you?

No, not always. Besides, you're not one to talk, considering how you've
behaved on this newsgroup over the past few days.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

In article <250320081323334381%>,
nospam <> wrote:

> > > Jesus, how hard is this for people to understand. Just try it.
> > > ssh into your machine when logged out and you will only see the
> > > boot volume.
> >
> > How am I supposed to do that with only one computer?
>
> so you can't actually disprove what he says, yet you do so anyway?

I didn't try to disprove it; I actually asked how he knew.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

In article <250320081554486589%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone. ca>,
Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote:

> So my behaviour excuses yours?

No, I didn't say that; I merely said that your taking this high and
mighty, self righteous attitude smacks of rank hypocrisy.

Oh, and your behavior was much worse than mine.

--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.

On 2008-03-25, thepixelfreak <> wrote:

> User could be logged in from half way around the world and would
> _expect_ the system's resources to be available.

Or the user could have opened their MacBook, logged in, connected a USB
memory stick to save a file on - and then logged out and closed the
MacBook ready to slip into its case when they realise that they forgot
to to remove the memory stick. But never fear, the OS has saved you the
hassle by unmounting it when you logged out - no need to open it up and
log back in again to unmount it (as I understand it USB drives are not
unmounted when the machine sleeps and are expected to still be there
when it wakes).

It seems like a good default behaviour for the typical Mac user who has
never even used Terminal.app let alone disabled sleep, enabled remote
login and then connects remotely over ssh. People who need drives
mounted permanently should have no trouble figuring out how to do it.

The thing about Time Machine not being able to back up external drives
when nobody is logged in does seem like it could be a problem, but then
again, when I am not logged in my machine is almost always sleeping so
Time Machine wouldn't run anyway would it?

Ian

--
Ian Gregory
http://www.zenatode.org.uk/ian/