![]() ![]() You could perhaps then install Big Sur into that volume group, but I opted to use what CCC terms its Legacy Bootable Backup option. ![]() If you then make a regular clone to one of those containers from a bootable volume group using Carbon Copy Cloner 6, the default is to omit the System volume. I prepared my external SATA/USB-C SSD by connecting it to a USB-A port on my M1 Mac mini, which I know works reliably for booting, then using Disk Utility to divide it into a series of 100 GB containers, each of which will contain a different version of Big Sur. The alternative is to keep old versions in Virtual Machines in Parallels Desktop. SATA/USB-C disks may need to be connected to a USB-A port rather than USB-C. Some external disks can only boot when physically connected in certain ways, e.g.M1 Macs can’t boot from an older release of Big Sur without setting that bootable volume group to Reduced Security using Startup Security Utility in recoveryOS.This currently appears insoluble, making it essential to create each bootable system when that version of Big Sur is still current. Full installers for older versions of Big Sur don’t work when run in a later release.M1 Macs pose several problems for doing this: This article explores how successful making full clones can be, specifically whether you can use them to assemble a multi-boot disk containing multiple versions of Big Sur.ĭevelopers, researchers and system administrators often keep a collection of previous bootable systems so they can go back and run tests under those older versions, for instance when someone reports a bug which can’t be reproduced in the current macOS. The latest version 6 of Carbon Copy Cloner can now use macOS tools to make a full clone of a Big Sur System Volume Group, although this is no longer recommended. Thanks again for all your interesting insights.Until recently, the only reliable way to create an external bootable disk on an M1 Mac has been to install Big Sur on it, either in recoveryOS or using the full Installer app. It is articles such as the following, that make me wish I could utilize both back up strategies. I am still not clear on whether or not i can use one volume for a clone and the other for BOTH media storage AND time machine. I guess i will have to go with the 2 partitions. This way you could make a clone, run Time Machine and re-partition at anytime without interfering with your media storage."ĭo you mean, put a clone on one drive (and then disconnect it) and then put time machine and media on a separate drive? What do you mean by "re-partition at anytime without interfering with your media storage?" I wish I could justify purchasing another external drive at this time, but with a new imac AND a new lacie 500 GB all in a weeks time, i just can't spend more right now. There is one thing you said, I am unclear on - You said, "Personally I would keep my backup drive and media storage not just on another partition but on a separate drive. Wow! I had no idea a block-level clone would require THAT kind of space! You wonder how anyone can really afford to do that! I understand what you are saying about seeing that 20 GB as future cloning space. Don't think of it as lost space but rather future cloning space. ![]() Even with the 15-20GB headroom on your CCC partition. Otherwise partitioning the drive into 2 equal or near so parts is good. This way you could make a clone, run Time Machine and re-partition at anytime without interfering with your media storage. Personally I would keep my backup drive and media storage not just on another partition but on a separate drive. Yes since you know exactly how big your clone will be you can make the partition smaller like with only 1GB of head room but the problem with that is what if in the future your system drive is likely to be a little bit larger the next time you want to clone it and you wouldn't want to re-partition down the road if you are using the other partition for something else. ![]() Since your partition is only 200GB this is why it's giving you the warning that it cannot do a block-level clone. However if you were to do a block level clone you would need 298GB of space on the destination as it will copy every block on the drive whether anything is being stored on it or not. Since you are using 160GB on the drive if you do a file-level clone it will copy all 160GB to the destination including all hidden system files. For instance, I'm guessing your internal drive is probably a 320GB so a 320 is actually going to be about 298GB after formatting. Actually a block level clone would take much longer than a file clone because it will copy every block on the entire drive even blocks not containing any data. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |