Others have already tried in the past and when "cp" counts as a hint, they've failed. I am most certainly not able to draw the line, as this is and always be subjective. So the "line" should be one the community draws. It is still open how that could happen. But if nobody does anything, things won't get better. If you like that or not. This is a very good tool. So I started to vote for good hints and vote less for trivial "hints". And I am trying to make people aware that not everything they perceive as a hint really is worth blogging about.
I wish more people would speak out, so as to learn their opinion. If the majority really thinks that "cp" is a hint, well, then I would not say anything about it anymore. Your formula is way too easy. The reasons for that I don't But I see now why "cp" counts as a "hint" and "cp -H" will be the next big thing. I am sorry if I said something you don't like. But it will not get better by standing by and shaking the head. You can always delete my posts, send me a pm or move it to some place you seem more appropriate. How short-sighted. This hint solved a problem for me that I've been wrestling with for a week.
I only wish it would have been posted 7 days ago ;-. I would agree that this hint is somewhat trivial but dont forget there are many Mac Users who never touch the Unix part of OSX so a simple "cp" or "rsync" can be mind-boggling as man-pages are often confusing and cumbersome to read.
Verifying the rsync command before running it for real – using a dry-run
Or the There is simply no way to "censor" the quality of a hint so just read or ignore.. I welcome complaints, but really, they have no value as part of the thread of comments on the hint itself: they just confuse users who are looking for discussion on the hint and various alternatives.
For feedback, please feel free to email me directly there's a link on every page , or even better, start a public discussion on it on the forum site, forums. Feel free to submit "Why macosxhints. Posting an off-topic rant about why a given hint sucks won't do a thing to change anything in the long run. First, there's no way I can follow every thread in every hint to see the general opinion, and second, it spreads that opinion out over a large base, so it's hard to tell whether complaints about the hints are an exception or a trend.
I long ago gave up trying to make everyone happy; life's too short for that. I know that any given hint will help some people, not help others, and genuinely piss off some other group of people. And no, I don't make money based on hint volume. I'm on salary. Never in my time with Macworld have I been told how many hints to publish, or that my ad revenues were down or up and that my pay would therefore drop or increase.
So there's no "pressure" to publish a certain number of hints per day. I publish things I think at least some number of people may find interesting -- if you grossly disagree with my approach, another alternative is to launch your own site, focused only on those hints you find hint-worthy. But really, if you're just going to complain about the hints, please either do it to me directly, or via the forum site. Posting complaints in the hint thread does nothing but make the hint harder to use for those trying to read through it.
I've only deleted one account here that I can recall, and that was because the user physically threatened to harm myself and my family. If you use foul language, I may edit your post; if you're a spammer, I'll delete your post. Other than that, I leave things alone. I see your point. Sorry to have voiced my opinion in the wrong place. I'll now unsubscribe this thread as I assume everything has been said and insults like "arrogance" or whatever else imbecile members try to phrase won't help this at all.
What arrogance. This hint generated lots of posts so it's of interest to Then you attack the site itself. OMG, go find a site that meets all your needs. Oh wait, none exist. Some people just complain, some people try and help. How about you switching sides and try and help someone I'd say the 'cp' command is indeed perfect for that. It's funny how many people don't read the requirements the dng's will never change and over-engineer their solutions and don't check existing comments. Of course, then you will have to use rsync ; hope this helps JM.
Some of you aren't understanding my situation. My photos are RAW files. Those files never change. It's one of the major points about RAW. So my requirement is far simpler than many people are assuming below. The process for copying is best illustrated thus: "Is this file already on the target volume? Otherwise copy it. That's it! The problem with rsync is that it is capable of doing stuff to my source directory. Given the documentation is not easy to understand for me at least , I opted for a command that I could be sure would not touch my source directory.
Get your options wrong with rsync and you could end up deleting original files.
As for speed, it was whipping through all my photos in well under a minute before copying the new stuff. The speed of my network was the bottleneck, not the speed of the command. So in summary. Simple is often best.
Subscribe to RSS
In fact, I do use aRsync for another task, but that was also a voyage of fear. Not if you already know that fact. And now I do, thank you. Once again - come at this with NO prior knowledge of rsync and its syntax. I honestly had no idea it existed before I tried to solve this problem. It's touted as a two-way syncing tool. Unless I understand it, I'm not trusting it to leave my source files alone. I think you'd agree the prospect of deleting your only copy of a photo while intending to back it up is the definition of a pretty bad day. When I want a fried ham and cheese sandwich, I usually put a frying pan on the stove, fry the ham and let the cheese melt over it right before it's done.
Now, I could put the ham and the cheese in the microwave oven and probably get a similar result, but sometimes the "right tool for the right job" is the way to go. Also, I find it hard to believe that the original poster had trouble with rsync's very simple local-file-copy syntax but he was able to come up with that multi-flag monstrosity in cp.
Well, believe. The first presumption that cp gives is "I'm not endangering my source files". It copies from a to b. There was some testing done to perfect the flags, sure. And I admit to not realising the --dry-run option of rsync. But all of you rsync fans have all been using it and have learnt its features. Try approaching it from the point of view of someone who didn't know it existed until they had these precious files to back up. I've used my fair share of technology too. I know when I understand something and I know when I don't. I know how horribly things can go wrong if I don't understand.
I could find no web resource that gave me any greater level of understanding.
How to merge two folders in macOS using rsync in orahehunumen.tk – Swiss Mac User
Actually, the same is true for the cp command. A rather odd approach, really. In this hint, I gave an explicit use case and an exact syntax that works so that others may find in their searching what I couldn't. I only kid. I didn't mean to insult you personally. I was just trying to point out that while your usage of cp accomplishes what you are looking to do, you've got to understand that the vast majority of people here are going to say it's the wrong way to do the job.
Once again, don't take it as a personal insult, but I find it exceptionally hard to believe that you couldn't find a decent rsync tutorial. A Google search for 'rsync copy local directory' should provide you with tons of useful links. I know it will, because it did for me! I use rsync extensively both at home and on the job, but I only tap the bare minimum of its capabilities. As several people have posted here already, the rsync equivalent of what you are doing is almost like your cp command, but with less flags.
Granted, this isn't the old days of time-sharing on the VAX when using an extra process when you didn't need to got you in trouble, but following those old practices are still a good idea, because they are effective and efficient. I rsync a GB iTunes Library every night--maintaining metadata like playcounts and ratings--and it runs in less than a minute from one FireWire drive to a USB2 drive on my Mac mini.
I think it's things like this that have caused people to get so up-in-arms about pushing you toward rsync. It's an amazing app, and is really what you're looking for here. If you really couldn't find the answer by Googling, you could have posted in the forums here and got a solid answer back PDQ. I'm not far behind you. There is some cross-over in functionality, but we've got so many folks who just want to force Excel into being a database, and FMP into being a spreadsheet app. We get the Adobe Creative Suite for our marketing staff.
They've got both Photoshop and Illustrator in this suite. Yet they often want to draw in Photoshop, and edit in Illustrator. In both cases, yeah you can probably do what you want to do my using the "wrong" app, but it's just much easier if you use the right tool for the right job. Like I said, I just use a minimum of its capabilities, but every new thing I learn is a complete joy. Take the time, ask for help, find the solution.
If the Time Machine backup disk for your Mac is full
It will be worth it. Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I understand and appreciate your comments. As always, knowing exactly what to search for is the key. I had no idea, until now, that "local" had special meaning in rsync terms. It also would be useful to know both the version of iTunes you are using and the version of rsync. Ok, on my very large terminal window cp has a man page of two pages.
Who's gonna read all that? If I had to read all that, just to copy some files, you'd better not cross my way in one of those smug RTFM T-shirts, cause I gonna beat the hell outta you. A further, and probably final comment. After re-reading most of the comments I feel I've learnt a lot more about rsync.
But please note this. While most of the offered rsync solutions will do the job, there are several different variations to the options and even two different versions of rsync itself, offering further variations. I assume cp has been around with most of its 11 options since time immemorial and I doubt though I don't know for fact that there are different flavours of it. I stand by my claim that I chose the simple option.
That said, now that I am beginning to understand rsync, I see a future for it on my system. Being a photographer, I see a BIG problem with the cp solution: You assume that no raw file will ever have the same filename as an already existing one. Digital cameras have a limited number of filenames, and then starts to reuse them. Those new files will not be copied, and you will never know Is there an rsync option that will retain old versions of files as well as copying the new ones?
I had a quick look at the man page and couldn't find one, but I know that, for example, Carbon Copy Cloner, which provides a GUI interface for configuring rsync clones of volumes etc. I've read this hint and comments with interest, and I appreciate the effort our original poster, and our commenters, have put into them.
There's so much detail that I wish for an article that summarizes one or two good solutions, with explanations that nail down a good practice for Mac OSX users. It's great to learn about options that a macports user can install, to be sure. I'd like to know about the cp or rsync options I should use on an unaltered installation of Leopard or Snow Leopard. While apparently everyone has already said this, I think this hint is a horrible idea.
Using cp is fine for copying, but backup is such a different beast. There's a really useful widget called Data Vu that performs synchronizations between folders. This is one of the biggest "flaws" in OS X, if you think of it as a long-time Windows user. Copying one folder over another one will not merge them like in Windows , but replace the contents of the destination folder, thereby erasing it completely.
Of course, you can't be blamed. The real problem with this behavior is not that it replaces the content. It's that the original destination folder is not moved to Trash. It is completely gone. Home Questions Tags Users Unanswered. I've copied a folder over another one on my Mac, what can I do? Ask Question. Der Hochstapler Registered User Registered User 6 6 silver badges 16 16 bronze badges. Not a mac user myself, but i think that'll work if its enabled.
Upgrade to OS X Lion. It finally fixes this issue. The message actually says, "do you want to replace it? Your only options are to restore from a Time Machine backup something you should always use when getting a Mac restore from a remote repository which is something I'd recommend for any coding you'll do in the future stop using the Mac and try to recover files, but I personally don't know if that's even realistic. Tools like Data Rescue 3 exist, but I can't recommend any, as I've never been in that situation.
I don't have the Time Machine on so as to conserve disk space I think. And and a remote repository isn't available either since I'm using the built in web server for mac. Lastly, I indeed tried out Disk Drill and it DID find my source codes but it requires a pro version and what's more alarming is when I exited it and rescanned, my sources weren't even there anymore.
- home cinema media player for mac.
- Your Answer.
- video editing software for mac for free.
Shedo Time Machine backs up to an external drive — it does not consume disk space on your Mac itself. A remote repository for example using github is just there to archive and store your code somewhere else, you can still run it on your local web server. Shedo As for the data recovery tools, there are probably plenty of them, but any further disk activity might overwrite your already deleted source files, especially if you're low on hard disk space.