3 ms·

That really depends on the user. As a developer, I’ve modified quite a few system files and would like those things backed up. It’s one reason I don’t use Back

That really depends on the user. As a developer, I’ve modified quite a few system files and would like those things backed up. It’s one reason I don’t use Backblaze – they refuse to backup system files. As an employer, I can imagine a situation in which those “cruft” files contain information about the actions of an employee that might be valuable in legal proceedings, or just providing they were terminated for cause. But 98% of the time you’re totally right about not needing to backup every little config file.

Leherenn 5y ago
I used to have a repo with scripts that "encodes" those change. Stuff like "setup-zsh.sh" and so on. On a new computer, I could just install git, clone the repo then run the scripts. I stopped doing that because I don't use new systems often enough to be worth it, and as someone else said it's also a good time to examine and improve your workflow.
xoa 5y ago
>As a developer, I’ve modified quite a few system files I do as well. Given that such things tend to be more fragile between OS releases though and easy to forget I usually prefer to recreate them for upgrades or reinstalls anyway. Also provides an opportunity to reevaluate them. So these days I think the better way to go about it is with automation as much as possible rather than backups. That said: >It’s one reason I don’t use Backblaze – they refuse to backup system files. Well, you can use something like CCC to image your startup disk to a file somewhere else, and regular BB will cheerfully take care of that. Makes restores mildly more work but not much given that a failure which nukes the system files means having to do some level of reinstall/recover anyway. I use Backblaze B2 though, which has maintained decent pricing vs S3 and is much more natively flexible. Having local systems backup to TrueNAS (or have data folders that just live there) then that go to B2 is another way to handle things. With Apple making custom restores ever more difficult though all that might need some reevaluation too :(. I miss how powerful and pleasant their tools were at one point with no subscriptions or WAN required, and will always be a bit bummed things didn't go the way of adding your own signing to the system image utility, Net Boot/Net Install etc they already had going. Macs were really great to run heavily off a LAN back around 10.5.

Leherenn 5y ago

I used to have a repo with scripts that "encodes" those change. Stuff like "setup-zsh.sh" and so on. On a new computer, I could just install git, clone the repo then run the scripts. I stopped doing that because I don't use new systems often enough to be worth it, and as someone else said it's also a good time to examine and improve your workflow.

xoa 5y ago

>As a developer, I’ve modified quite a few system files I do as well. Given that such things tend to be more fragile between OS releases though and easy to forget I usually prefer to recreate them for upgrades or reinstalls anyway. Also provides an opportunity to reevaluate them. So these days I think the better way to go about it is with automation as much as possible rather than backups. That said: >It’s one reason I don’t use Backblaze – they refuse to backup system files. Well, you can use something like CCC to image your startup disk to a file somewhere else, and regular BB will cheerfully take care of that. Makes restores mildly more work but not much given that a failure which nukes the system files means having to do some level of reinstall/recover anyway. I use Backblaze B2 though, which has maintained decent pricing vs S3 and is much more natively flexible. Having local systems backup to TrueNAS (or have data folders that just live there) then that go to B2 is another way to handle things. With Apple making custom restores ever more difficult though all that might need some reevaluation too :(. I miss how powerful and pleasant their tools were at one point with no subscriptions or WAN required, and will always be a bit bummed things didn't go the way of adding your own signing to the system image utility, Net Boot/Net Install etc they already had going. Macs were really great to run heavily off a LAN back around 10.5.