Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2024 09:51:00 +0000 From: "Mark Delany" <x9k@charlie.emu.st> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD+samba as a time machine server for OSX/Sonoma? Message-ID: <0.2.0-final-1725702660.839-0xb11c62@qmda.emu.st> In-Reply-To: <8E0CDC45-6521-4973-A349-9B5824C75863@freebsd.org> References: <c7183af3-4a8b-4f12-848f-09f11e8b0e8f@freebsd.org> <8E0CDC45-6521-4973-A349-9B5824C75863@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07Sep24, David Chisnall apparently wrote: > I believe this was broken by a macOS update around February. > > I recently tried to upgrade to samba419 and so far I'm unsuccessful. The error is > > "The backup disk image could not be created" and I'm running 14.1. I'm going to ask a silly question here. But why are people running samba instead of netatalk if they are only using the timemachine backup capability? I often had difficulting with Samba and timemachine and then I stumbled across an article on how to use netatalk - sorry, link is lost now, but I can provide configs - and I've never looked back. Timemachine backups and restores work flawlessly and have done so across a number of previous macOS versions. I have nothing against Samba, but it's kinda the swiss-army knife of network file systems with plenty of complexity, whereas netatalk seems much more specific and simpler. What am I missing? Mark.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0.2.0-final-1725702660.839-0xb11c62>