macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
db
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

db
I perchance stumbled upon this post [1] and couldn't find what's the actual state.

In my system du reports ~8.8G for my prefix while Finder ~9.4.

What's changed from then?

[1] https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2010-May/011938.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Clemens Lang-2
Hi,

----- On 13 Aug, 2017, at 14:28, db [hidden email] wrote:

> I perchance stumbled upon this post [1] and couldn't find what's the actual
> state.
>
> In my system du reports ~8.8G for my prefix while Finder ~9.4.
>
> What's changed from then?

MacPorts no longer uses hardlinks. We now keep the pristine state in archives
in /opt/local/var/macports/software instead of hardlinking everything from
there.

--
Clemens Lang
db
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

db
On 13 Aug 2017, at 18:46, Clemens Lang <[hidden email]> wrote:
> MacPorts no longer uses hardlinks. We now keep the pristine state in archives in /opt/local/var/macports/software instead of hardlinking everything from there.

Not even for other parts that I'm not aware of, that would explain the difference between Finder and du?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Rainer Müller-4
On 08/13/2017 07:57 PM, db wrote:
> On 13 Aug 2017, at 18:46, Clemens Lang <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> MacPorts no longer uses hardlinks. We now keep the pristine state in archives in /opt/local/var/macports/software instead of hardlinking everything from there.
>
> Not even for other parts that I'm not aware of, that would explain the difference between Finder and du?

Finder on macOS uses base 10, so "GB" stands for 1000*1000*1000 Bytes.
du(1) uses base 2, so "G" means 1024*1024*1024 Bytes.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201402

Rainer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Mark Anderson-10
Call du with --si and you should get numbers that match.

—Mark
_______________________
Mark E. Anderson <[hidden email]>

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Rainer Müller <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 08/13/2017 07:57 PM, db wrote:
> On 13 Aug 2017, at 18:46, Clemens Lang <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> MacPorts no longer uses hardlinks. We now keep the pristine state in archives in /opt/local/var/macports/software instead of hardlinking everything from there.
>
> Not even for other parts that I'm not aware of, that would explain the difference between Finder and du?

Finder on macOS uses base 10, so "GB" stands for 1000*1000*1000 Bytes.
du(1) uses base 2, so "G" means 1024*1024*1024 Bytes.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201402

Rainer

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Dave Horsfall
In reply to this post by Rainer Müller-4
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017, Rainer Müller wrote:

> Finder on macOS uses base 10, so "GB" stands for 1000*1000*1000 Bytes.
> du(1) uses base 2, so "G" means 1024*1024*1024 Bytes.

It's for this reason that I've always referred to the base-10 usage as
"marketing MB", because the numbers are bigger.  There is a trend to use
e.g. "MiB" and "GiB" for the real number (amongst us computer freaks who
use base-2).

--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
db
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

db
In reply to this post by Rainer Müller-4
On 14 Aug 2017, at 14:16, Rainer Müller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Finder on macOS uses base 10

Thanks. Somehow I thought it had been reverted without ever verifying. Oh well…
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Michael_google gmail_Gersten
In reply to this post by Dave Horsfall
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017, Rainer Müller wrote:
>
>> Finder on macOS uses base 10, so "GB" stands for 1000*1000*1000 Bytes. du(1) uses base 2, so "G" means 1024*1024*1024 Bytes.
>
> It's for this reason that I've always referred to the base-10 usage as "marketing MB", because the numbers are bigger.  There is a trend to use e.g. "MiB" and "GiB" for the real number (amongst us computer freaks who use base-2).

It's not marketing. It's very much a real issue.

Is one computer MB 1000 * 1024? Before you think you know, have you checked floppies?
When you are dealing with network speeds, and communications, how many bits are in a kilobit? That is something that dates back to telephone signaling, not a recent hard drive marketing thing.

Yes, it's much easier for computer hardware to use 2^10 instead of 10^3. But as soon as you move away from "I have N wires that I'm pulsing twice for a row and column select", or away from "There are this many bits in a register", and ask yourself "Why do we use these oddities and call them standard prefixes?", can you come up with any answer other than "Because other people who came before me and did not understand the problem used those terms"?

We now understand the confusion and problem of having two different meanings for the same prefix. So, the newer, inaccurate one got renamed with an "i".

---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Peter B. West
When I see MiB, I think million bytes. Is this wrong?

One of the disk manufacturers was taken to court over advertising a device with n gigabytes of storage, meaning n*1,000,000,000 bytes. The buyer assumed that a Gb was 1K*1K*1K bytes, where 1K was 1024. The court agreed with the plaintiff. Now on all disks, AFAIAA, the size of a Gb is spelled out.
--
Peter West
[hidden email]
“My soul magnifies the Lord…”

> On 15 Aug 2017, at 2:30 am, Michael <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017, Rainer Müller wrote:
>>
>>> Finder on macOS uses base 10, so "GB" stands for 1000*1000*1000 Bytes. du(1) uses base 2, so "G" means 1024*1024*1024 Bytes.
>>
>> It's for this reason that I've always referred to the base-10 usage as "marketing MB", because the numbers are bigger.  There is a trend to use e.g. "MiB" and "GiB" for the real number (amongst us computer freaks who use base-2).
>
> It's not marketing. It's very much a real issue.
>
> Is one computer MB 1000 * 1024? Before you think you know, have you checked floppies?
> When you are dealing with network speeds, and communications, how many bits are in a kilobit? That is something that dates back to telephone signaling, not a recent hard drive marketing thing.
>
> Yes, it's much easier for computer hardware to use 2^10 instead of 10^3. But as soon as you move away from "I have N wires that I'm pulsing twice for a row and column select", or away from "There are this many bits in a register", and ask yourself "Why do we use these oddities and call them standard prefixes?", can you come up with any answer other than "Because other people who came before me and did not understand the problem used those terms"?
>
> We now understand the confusion and problem of having two different meanings for the same prefix. So, the newer, inaccurate one got renamed with an "i".



signature.asc (242 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Ryan Schmidt-24

On Aug 14, 2017, at 19:04, Peter West wrote:

> When I see MiB, I think million bytes. Is this wrong?

Yes, that is wrong, or at least is not what other people mean.

1 MB = one megabyte = 10^6 bytes = 1,000,000 bytes
1 MiB = one mebibyte (what we used to call one megabyte) = 2^20 bytes = 1,048,576 bytes

Same goes for the other units (kibibytes, gibibytes, tebibytes, etc.).

See:

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Peter B. West
Thanks Ryan.

That sucks, quite apart from the woeful UX of MiB.

Mebibyte? Really? Kibibyte? Gibibyte?

It sounds like a toddler demanding a smartphone.

"Oh how we laughed when people took us seriously!”

--
Peter West
[hidden email]
“My soul magnifies the Lord…”


> On 15 Aug 2017, at 8:41 pm, Ryan Schmidt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 14, 2017, at 19:04, Peter West wrote:
>
>> When I see MiB, I think million bytes. Is this wrong?
>
> Yes, that is wrong, or at least is not what other people mean.
>
> 1 MB = one megabyte = 10^6 bytes = 1,000,000 bytes
> 1 MiB = one mebibyte (what we used to call one megabyte) = 2^20 bytes = 1,048,576 bytes
>
> Same goes for the other units (kibibytes, gibibytes, tebibytes, etc.).
>
> See:
>
> - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix
> - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte
>
>


signature.asc (242 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Peter Hancock
In reply to this post by Ryan Schmidt-24
To a rabid base2 fanatic, the "10" in 2^10 is
repulsively decimal. What is it? 2^3 + 2 = 2^(2+1) + 2
or

      2^(2^2^0 + 2^0) + 2^2^0

if you prefer.  Ugh.

Aren't there numerical notations that use a comma
to chunk digits 4 at a time?  And in the binary world we use 10?!

I would have thought that to a base2 fanatic, the "G"
should be 2^(2^5), ie. 4 decimal G's.
(2^2 + 2^0)'s not so bad in the world of powers of 2.




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: macports' hardlinks and time machine backups

Dave Horsfall
In reply to this post by Peter B. West
On Tue, 15 Aug 2017, Peter West wrote:

> When I see MiB, I think million bytes. Is this wrong?

Yes; it's 1024*1024.  Think of powers of 2.

--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
Loading...