"no cache files" backup reporting errors with cache files

[frednow]

 

In my backup set I've selected "all files except cache files."

 

 

 

Then why do I sometimes get execution errors involving cache files?

 

 

 

Today I got four errors ... three of them involve cache files (one System entropy, two Firefox). The fourth error involves "ntp.drift" file; don't know what that is.

 

 

 

Why is Retrospect trying to backup cache files when I've instructed it not to?

 

 

 

Fred

 

 

 

 

 

[waltr]

hi fred,

 

could you post the errors? or just an example of what you are seeing?

 

i suspect that you are getting scanning errors. even though you have excluded these files from being backed up, Retrospect will still scan all the files on the source volume. you should not be getting copy errors on files excluded by a selector.

[frednow]

Thanks for your reply, Walt.

 

Here are the errors copied from the log; I've substituted xxxxxx for my user name:

 

3/24/2006 6:04:04 AM: Comparing Macintosh HD…

 

File “SystemEntropyCache”: different modification date/time (set: 3/24/2006 5:00:31 AM, vol: 3/24/2006 6:00:32 AM), path: “Macintosh HD/private/var/db/SystemEntropyCache”.

 

File “ntp.drift”: different creation date/time (set: 3/24/2006 5:00:50 AM, vol: 3/24/2006 6:00:49 AM), path: “Macintosh HD/private/var/run/ntp.drift”.

 

File “_CACHE_001_”: different modification date/time (set: 3/24/2006 5:15:53 AM, vol: 3/24/2006 6:15:52 AM), path: “Macintosh HD/Users/xxxxxx/Library/Caches/Firefox/Profiles/sycp6ged.default/Cache/_CACHE_001_”.

 

File “A89F4DBCd01”: different data size (set: 16,427, vol: 16,450), path: “Macintosh HD/Users/xxxxxx/Library/Caches/Firefox/Profiles/sycp6ged.default/Cache/A89F4DBCd01”.

[waltr]

hi fred,

 

i see the problem. although i'm sure EMC tries to keep these built in 'Selectors' up to date, when i go to 'special->selectors' and choose 'all files except cache files' i can see that Firefox is not specified in this selector. neither are the other files you are getting errors on.

 

you could manually add them to the selector (or the folders they are contained in) if you'd like. if i were going to do this i would make a copy of the selector (highlight it and go to the 'Selectors' menu and pick 'Duplicate') and make changes to _that_ Selector so that i keep the default one in case i need to use a 'clean' one again someday.

 

here is a link to the 6.X manual:

 

http://kb.dantz.com/article.asp?article=1116&p=2

 

you may want to read, "Using Selectors" starting on page 177.

[CallMeDave]

Quote:

---

Why is Retrospect trying to backup cache files when I've instructed it not to?

 

---

 

The default cache selector is written for browser cache files only, not system files. That explains the first errors you list.

 

The Firefox files are being picked up because Retrospect doesn't include Firefox in its list; probably the Selector was constructed when Firefox was still Firebird. You can edit the selector and tweek it if you wish.

 

Dave

[dhwagner]

I believe it is better to leave the EMC/Dantz-supplied selectors alone. Instead, build your own custom selector -- you could start by duplicating the Dantz-supplied "all except cache files" selector. Or you could construct a selector that starts by including all files selected by the "all except cache files" selector, and then add your own exclusions.

 

That way, when Retrospect is updated, just maybe, the Dantz-supplied selector can be updated, yet you don't lose your own customizations.

[frednow]

 

Here's what I don't understand: when I select "all files except cache files," why on earth wouldn't Retrospect, at a minimum, skip over any files with the word "cache" in them? That seems as basic as dirt. And then, any file whose path indicates it's a cache file? I don't get it.

 

 

 

By the way, when this happens, if I restart Mac, and then execute the backup again with no applications open, there are no errors.

 

 

 

Anyway, I think I'd rather follow dhwagner's advice to leave the resident selectors alone and make my own. The thing is, I find the whole process of creating custom selectors totally inscrutable ... makes my head swim, and then ache. I need excruciatingly obvious, complete step-by-step instructions for a dunderhead like me.

 

 

 

And as long as I'm going to venture into the unknown territory of custom selectors, is there some reason why there's no built-in selector "all files except applications" ... is there some reason I can't see in front of my nose not to omit applications? And if there's no reason not to omit applications, how would I create custom selector to do so?

 

 

 

Thanks in advance for the help.

 

 

 

Fred

 

 

 

[CallMeDave]

Quote:

---

That seems as basic as dirt.

 

---

 

Perhaps if the selector had been more precisely named as "all files except browser cache files" then you wouldn't find it quite so dirty. That is what the selector was designed for, and that is what it attempts to do.

 

It's easy as dirt to make a selector to exclude all files who's name ends with .cache, which would handle all files who's names end in .cache. It's also easy as dirt to construct a selector to match files enclosed in the folder at /Library/Caches and/or ~/Library/Caches.

 

Built-in selectors are created with the same tools that are available to Retrospect (other then Express) users. Double click on one of the built-in choices and note its syntax, then use that to make your own.

 

> is there some reason why there's no built-in selector "all files except applications" .

 

There are almost infinite possibilities for selectors, and not every one could be provided by the developer. That's why the program allows custom creation of whatever the user wants.

 

As for you specific request, you could filter for modern OS X applications with a simple "name ends with .app"

Users who want a complete backup capable of restoring a disk to a useful state without reinstalling software wouldn't want to do this. Everybody's needs are different.

 

Dave

[frednow]

Walt, I took a look at the actual "except cache files" selector, and I now think maybe it would be better to take your advice to edit the existing one instead of starting from scratch.

 

Of course, I would Duplicate first and make changes to the copy, or would it be effectively the same if I change the existing one and then "save as"? Or is there a difference I'm not aware of between those two procedures?

 

In either case, whether I Duplicate first, or edit and then "save as," can I just take one of the browsers listed in it that I don't use, like Camino or Chimera, and change it to Firefox?

 

Thanks,

Fred

 

 

[frednow]

Quote:

---

 

As for you specific request, you could filter for modern OS X applications with a simple "name ends with .app"

[but] users who want a complete backup capable of restoring a disk to a useful state without reinstalling software wouldn't want to do this.

 

---

 

Thanks, Dave. That's a good point.

 

Fred

 

[CallMeDave]

Quote:

---

can I just take one of the browsers listed in it that I don't use, like Camino or Chimera, and change it to Firefox?

 

---

 

You can, but I can't guarantee that it will work.

 

As you can see from the different sorts of syntax used for the different browsers, each program is free to store cache files in different ways.

 

Firefox/Mozilla has the odd path ~/Library/Application Support/Firefox/Profiles/gibberish.default/cache/, so be sure whatever built-in you modify still points to the correct place.

 

Dave

[frednow]

Dave, I looked where you pointed:

 

~/Library/Application Support/Firefox/Profiles/gibberish.default/cache/

 

and all I found was a Cache.Trash folder, seemingly empty.

 

Elsewhere in ~/Library is a folder called Caches, and within it is Firefox/Profiles/gibberish.default/Cache with a whole bunch of cache files in it.

 

Also in ~/Library is a Mozilla/Profiles/(my actual name)/gibberish.slt/Cache with just a few cache files in it.

 

And then in ~/Documents I find another Mozilla/Profiles/(my actual name)/gibberish.slt/Cache and then a bunch of what appear to be Netscape files.

 

 

 

You see, this is exactly why my head is aching ... I feel all topsy turvy, and my instinct is to walk away from the computer and have a nice cold Pilsner Urquell.

 

Of course, that doesn't solve the problem I originally wrote about, does it?

 

On the other hand, it couldn't hoit.

 

Fred