-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improve macOS support #560
Comments
Hi @amarendra, it will take a while, because it's loading metadata about your existing archives (from your old computer). That said, I would expect it to be 2-10 minutes, not 2-3 hours! I will investigate for possible causes. |
Even this (current) try has taken a solid ~50 mins
Please let me know if I can help. Logs etc (and where I can find them). I can email you my Tarnsap a/c email if you would like that to see pings from my machine by any chance. |
Ouch. Yeah, 50 minutes is ridiculous. Sorry. :( Let's try it on the command line, since that has better information. If you open a terminal, and copy your tarsnap keyfile to your directory, then try:
( On my system (with only a small number of archives), I see:
and it takes 56 seconds. I'm sure that you have more than 47 archives, but at least you should see the progress as they go by. I don't personally have access to the tarsnap server logs, but if this |
Tried in cli
It verified 1130/1130 archives. (I might have forgotten but I think I had some sort of pruning set up on my last machine.) Then the whole processes terminated on few seconds after archive verification was finished with this printed
But either way, it didn't result in anything for 2-3 hours from the GUI (or I wouldn't know whether it was trying albeit slowly maybe). Also I did see some transfer yesterday in my account. However the machine name is as my old machine name so I believe that is because the key is mapped to that machine name, right? |
Ok, the As for whether 1130 archives is too many... well, it's not necessarily "too many", but the more archives you have, the more time it will take for operations like Yes, your machine name is mapped to your key. The time it takes in the GUI should be pretty much exactly the same as it took on the command-line; or maybe 0.5 seconds longer. So the GUI is definitely doing something bad. Let's avoid the GUI's setup wizard. You have the tarsnap cache already, from the We need to start by showing your user's Library folder:
Now we can do the Tarsnap app stuff:
I apologize for all this trouble. |
It crashed on step 11 when I closed the app. Sharing log tarsnap.crash.log. (Note: I don't recall when was the last time tarsnap-gui crashed on me, at least I didn't notice it - but then I was using it on Catalina so far). But when I restarted 12 step was as expected. Updating archives list from remote took 12 mins. But "updating archives from remote" happened again when I started Tarsnap and it took as long. Even if I just close the app after archive list update was done once and I merely restart the app again it takes that much time. Is it expected - due to my number of archives? Anyway to improve this (other than reducing the archive numbers which I will).
When I tried to trigger backup for a job I got this warning My source list is completely inside I remember facing this on my last Mac as well and giving Full Disk Access fixed it. Anyway I tried running a backup (even with this "Some backup paths…" warning) and it failed
And this is the log from the log file where Tarsnap has written logs:
From the log and the way I am used to read it it seem to have not been able to find "tarsnap" itself which is weird because it is present at I am stopping the debugging at this point. Please let me know what else I have to do. PS. Additionally could you please point me to a guide/tutorial where I can prune old archives? My plan is to keep certain annnual, weekly, daily numbers etc - but at the same time not loose any file. i.e if there is a file that is in just one archive then is there a way pruning would avoid deleting it? I am not sure I am clear on this. Also, if this issue is not the right place for this I can send this query in the mailing list (though this is also publicly available). |
Thanks for the crash log! I'm surprised that it crashed there, so this is giving me some ideas for things to add to the test suite. (I've recorded this as #564.) Unfortunately, there's no way to make the "updating archives from remote" faster with the current official release of the tarsnap CLI and GUI. (But I agree that 12 minutes is an unacceptable amount of time to wait to launch an app!) With the current tarsnap CLI and GUI, I would guess that this step will take around 5 seconds + 0.6 seconds per archive, for your computer and internet connection. So if you reduced your archives to 100, I would expect it to take approximately 1 minute. (But I agree that this is still too long to be a good user experience!) (#565) Regarding your backup, it seems that the GUI gets confused if some paths don't exist. For example, if your new computer doesn't have a directory called " Unfortunately, the GUI does not handle this at all well. I can't see any way to modify an existing job to remove non-existent paths. And at the very least, the warning message should say which path doesn't exist! (I've recorded this problem as #563) In the log file, the line:
actually means that In this case, I think it would be faster to get it working if you deleted the previous Job, and made a new Job. Based on the log file extract, you were trying to back up:
As for pruning old archives automatically, that's something that was mentioned in #34, but as you've seen in great detail, there's bigger problems in the GUI right now. Our website lists a few third-party command-line scripts which can help with this: |
Yes, indeed it is too long.
Everything is present. Vorta backs up the same set (+ some more) and it backed up all that just fine twice yesterday and once again just now. In fact yesterday Vorta tried and backed up with a warning because it could not find Don't you think it's a critical bug is tarsnap just fails the entire backup if it could not find one of the sources? And no, there's no source that doesn't exist. I had added everything again yesterday via GUI. I could have missed a quote or space or escape character if there was a config file (not sure there is one) but I added them all in the GUI.
There are no non-existent paths, I again cross verified it. So there is no way to know what exactly is failing? Is there way to read the sources list in some config file somewhere so that there I can see where that "empty space" source is being picked from? Because as you might know tarsnap-gui sources are decided from the UI where you select the paths so if something doesn't exist it was not selected, right?
As said above there is no such path. Or can you point to where the config file is so that I can try seeing there or maybe a db entry where I can see whether there is a config file.
I did not delete the previous job. I kept it because if am to use Tarsnap I will be using it with the GUI and would like to get it debugged why it is happening because imho it is not a trivial issue. I am here to provide you every log or information you need. Having said that - I did add a new job and added the same sources and it seems backup happened smoothly and real fast.
It has exactly the same sources selected as the erroneous job (I took screenshots to compare). Again, if there is a config lying somewhere on the disk it would be good to compare. The detailed log written on the disk wasn't really helpful it had few
I will check that.
Yes that is kinda concerning seeing some things have been around for multiple years if I am reading it correctly.
I will steer clear of them then :)
I will try that. Thank you. |
Checked it. There isn't really there anything about it or in the issue that is linked from there. So I guess nothing? Maybe I will try edit: Looks like https://www.google.com/search?q=tarsnap+pruning will have something I can start with and then mailing list if I am still clueless (and I will be clueless). |
Depending on your point of view, the situation is either better or worse than you imagine. The good news: the command-line tarsnap utility does exactly the right thing: it backs up as much as possible, prints a warning about about any missing paths, and quits with exit code 1 to indicate that there was a problem. The idea is that the user can then investigate why there was a missing path. The bad news: the GUI sees that something went wrong, and fails to add the archive to its list. (I've added this as #566) To make it weirder: if you close the app and open it again, the GUI discovers the newly-created archive.
I agree.
The intention is that the GUI will eventually be a useful and high-quality tool. It's clearly not there yet. The tarsnap "getting started" page states "There is no graphical user interface". If we thought that the GUI was in good shape, we would mention it on tarsnap.com. Now, I said "eventually". Can I give an estimate of when I think the GUI will be useful? Unfortunately, I cannot. For example, as we've discussed, waiting for 12 minutes on app startup is completely unacceptable; even waiting 1 minute is too long. Improving this cannot be done in the GUI by itself; it will require changing the command-line and possibly the server.
The GUI definitely needs a way to display what is failing. d0c40eb is a quick hack that does this, but that method doesn't allow people to un-select any missing paths, so it's not a complete fix. If you are very curious and can browse SQL files, you could take a look at Once you've opened the SQL database, click on "Browse Data", then change the table to "jobs". If you click on the "urls" cell of the appropriate row, you should see the paths that the job is trying to archive. But at this point, I don't think it would really help. I mean, since the GUI currently does not have a way to un-select any garbage in the list of files, then knowing that it has a bad filename would satisfy curiosity, but that wouldn't help with making archives.
Oh, I don't think you need to avoid them. It's more that because I'm an employee of Tarsnap, I cannot endorse (or un-endorse) any one of them. Hmm... it's fair for me to say this: Michael W. Lucas published "Tarsnap Masters" in 2015, and his book mentions Feather, Tarsnapper, and ACTS. On page 103, he says that he recommends ACTS for routine use.
(about pruning archives, and #34) Ah, sorry for not being clear. What I meant to say is "it's a requested feature, and it's on the list, but not implemented yet." |
I had actually used sqlite browser to look at the And yes the old job has The old job's So just to make it clear for myself - there is no pruning as of now? Not even a convoluted (for me) script way? Because 10 mins and 1000+ archives seem really too much as you mentioned. I am going to look at these and maybe give them a try. As long as I don't have to maintain a more than one script for tarsnap and few moving parts to maintain schedulers and all and can keep seeing regular - this succeeded, this failed, this happened with with this warning without having to oil the machinery every week I am good. (Lost all interested in tinkering with cli/etc, especially for things like personal data backup, after college days and days of various distros were over. Guess I am not paranoid enough ;))
That's a bummer really :) But thank you for debugging with me. I will hit the mailing list if I get stuck with those "helper scripts" or if I need to find a way for pruning the way I want to do. (Though I really wish there was a way communicate on the mailing list without exposing emails for harvesting in plain text - or a more classical mailman kind of way where I didn't have to send an email so I could easily use something like HideMyEmail, or even Github discussions). Thanks again for your patience. Really appreciate it. |
Thanks for checking the url list! I've added it as #567. (As always, no guarantee about when it'll be fixed; but at least it's recorded.) As for pruning: the GUI can delete individual archives, but there's no automatic pruning yet, sorry. If you want to do it on the command line, there's two options:
That will delete the archives Granted, I hear you about not wanting to mess around with the CLI for backups. Unfortunately, at the moment it's the most reliable way to use tarsnap. I'm just trying to give you as much information as possible, so you can decide how to proceed. As for the mailing list, unfortunately I'm not knowledgeable about the software and options out there for running a list. But if you'd prefer to avoid your email address going there, you could send the question to me privately, and I'll send the question to the list for you. (Anybody gathering email addresses from the list will already have mine!) |
There's a bunch of problems with current macOS. These need to be fixed on git
master
, and then backported into a new 1.0.3 release.tarsnapconfigure
can't find OpenSSL on Apple silicon (because homebrew changed the default installation directory for arm64)Fix in Fix macos openssl and typo tarsnap#594
tarsnap-gui can't compile on macOS with Qt 5.15Potential fix in macOS build failure as Qt no longer adds deprecated CFBundleGetInfoString #557
Can't find the command-line utilities. This is also because homebrew changed the default installation directory for arm64)Previous discusison in Command-line utilities not found when tarsnap is installed through Homebrew #168, although I thought that it was fixed in Also search /usr/local/bin on OSX #204.
apple-Q is disabled, so we can't quit that way (???). (clicking the red "X" still works, at least)theTPathLineBrowse.ui
widgets have a height of only 4 pixels or so (??).Likely in a later release:
--fsck
. Take a look at backporting Setupwizard_register "use existing keyfile" progress #552... although I'm not optimistic, since that PR benefited from the huge SetupWizard refactor, and the CmdlineTask refactor.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: