Getting Maxtor OneTouch III to work on MacTel

I recently bought a Maxtor (or is it Seagate?) OneTouch III external hard drive. It's a pretty sweet drive, maybe a bit big and noisy, but perfect for my needs - backing up my systems. One really nice thing is that it's totally Mac-centric: it ships preformatted with HFS+, it supports Firewire 400 and 800 (nice with the new iMac), and it includes Retrospect Express backup software, which originated on the Mac, as I recall.

It include a button on the front that you can program to do various things, the most obvious being to initiate a backup. But it didn't work; I'd push the button and nothing would happen. After poking around, I found this update for Intel Macs. After installing it (and rebooting), it works like a charm.

enjoy,
Charles.

What's in an OS X Package (.pkg) file?

I recently had occasion to figure out how packages work on OS X. This isn't an extensive treatise on the subject, and I didn't bother to look for any docs. This is just some poking around I did in the Finder and mostly in Terminal.

The original motivation was that I wanted to uninstall a package that I'd installed. The package file is Subversion-1.4.4.pkg. The first thing I learned is that packages are another case where a directory (aka folder) shows up as a single file in the Finder. You can see the contents in the Finder by control-clicking on the package file and selecting Show Package Contents. The Finder opens up a new window (just like any other folder).

All I see in my package is a folder called Contents. Within that folder, is a file called Archive.pax.gz, which is a compressed pax archive. Pax is an archive program like tar and cpio. (Actually, it's an experiment on genetic engineering - in order to "solve" the tar vs. cpio wars, they merged the two and called it pax, Latin for peace.) The pax archive was subsequently compressed with gzip - hence the gz extension.

Too see what's in the archive, we need to decompress it and get pax to print a listing of the contents. I did this as follows, although there are other ways to skin this cat:

cd /tmp
gzip -d < Subversion-1.4.4.pkg/Contents/Archive.pax.gz | pax -v

(Pax contains an option to do decompression, but I'm too old fashion.) Note that I redirect the compressed archive into gzip. I did this because I wanted to leave the archive compressed. I could have decompressed the archive and then ran pax on that, but I wanted to leave the entire package unharmed. The first bit of the output looks like:

-rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1664424 Jun 22 23:57 ./usr/local/bin/svnadmin
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1571744 Jun 22 23:57 ./usr/local/bin/svndumpfilter
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1664612 Jun 22 23:57 ./usr/local/bin/svnlook

So, we can see that these are the files that got installed (in /usr/local). One nice thing to note is that the path names are all relative - they begin with "./" rather than just "/". This means the files can be installed anywhere - change into a directory, extract the archive, and the files will show up in a directory called usr/local below your current directory.

How can I use all of this to uninstall these files? Again, there are many ways to skin the cat, but here's what I did. I extracted the archive to /tmp. ("I thought you wanted to remove the files. Why are you extracting them again?" Patience, my friend.)

cd /tmp
gzip -d < Subversion-1.4.4.pkg/Contents/Archive.pax.gz | pax -r

This creates all of the files, but under /tmp - e.g., /tmp/usr/local/bin/svnadmin. I can now use find to get me a list of just the files:

find usr -type f -print > /tmp/fff

I then looked through the file names in /tmp/fff, and they made sense, so I removed them all.

sudo rm -i `cat /tmp/fff`

The sudo command was needed because the files were not owned by my user ID. The package installer asked for the administrator password and installed the files owned by root (as I recall). Of course, I could have avoiding "installing" the files in /tmp by running the output of pax -v through some awk or perl, but the archive was small, and I knew the options to find off the top of my head - I would have had to look up some awk or perl, since I don't use them that often any more.

enjoy,
Charles.

P.S. This post almost never was: Blogger mangled the fonts repeatedly, and I almost gave up on it. Stupid JavaScript HTML editors!

New iMac

Even though I was wishing for a Core2 Mini, when it was (finally) released (somewhat silently), I opted instead for one of the new iMacs, and I'm loving it.

My original plan was to get a Mini and use a KVM along with the PC boat-anchor that I keep around for a client. However, after using a KVM for a while with other PCs, I realized that KVMs can be kinda hokey. For example, my KVM makes a keyboard look generic - i.e., it hides any special keys. Also, although I have a cool 22" Viewsonic LCD, it's not as nice as an Apple display.

I opted for the 20" 2.4Ghz model with the stock 1GB of memory. I was very pleased to see how easy it will be to upgrade the memory when I get a few extra dollars. The 24" was pretty tempting (the price is quite reasonable), but I figured if I ever need a larger display, I can use the external video connected to my (somewhat inferior) Viewsonic for a ~40" display experience.

The CPU is hella fast, although I admit I'm comparing it to an 800 Mhz G4 iMac which was significantly taxes (~20% CPU) running Firefox and Gmail. To date, the only time I'm maxed out the two cores was converting audio files into MP3 with iTunes. My Internet is still only 128K ISDN, which makes for slow Gmail, but Steve Jobs can't be expected to fix that.

The new, thin keyboard is something that cannot be appreciated in a store standing over it. You have to sit in front of it with a real chair in a real working position to appreciate the nice ergonomics. My one gripe is that my thumb drive is too fat to fit in the USB sockets.

And finally, the Apple educational discount and promotions were sweet. After the rebates, I'll have a free Nano and printer, both of which I gave to the wife - score!

Anyway, Joe Bob says, 5 stars (on a scale of 4) - check it out!

enjoy,
Charles

Core2 Mac Mini

There has been a fair amount of speculation about when/if Apple will release a version of the Mac Mini using the Core 2 Duo processor. For example:

Apple hints at Core 2 Duo Mac mini?

How Soon Will the Mac mini Go Core2?

Personally, I'm dying to see a Core2 Mini. At the moment, I'm stuck with a 800 Mhz G4 iMac that just doesn't cut it any more, but I can't afford a 20" Core2 Duo iMac.

For the sake of argument, why would Apple not update the Mini to the Core2? Part of that depends where Apple really sees the Mini. When the (G4) Mini first came out, one of the pitches was for PC developers to use it in addition to a PC via a KVM switch. In this scenario, it made sense for Apple to make it beefy.

When the first Intel Macs came out, the Mini had a Core processor (I'll call the Core processor the "Core1" just to be extra clear) just like the other Macs, in particular the iMac. They wanted the Core archiecture, but there weren't many of those processors, so the Mini and the iMac were pretty similar. Then the Core2 came out and Apple bumped the iMac to a Core2 but left the Mini at a Core1.

I take this to indicate that Apple is trying to create some diversity in the product line - i.e., the need to differentiate the Mini from the iMac. Thus, they need to keep the Mini crippled, and they're no longer pitching the Mini as a developer machine. This is (unfortunately) like the IBM PC Jr back in the day. Now, they have bumped both Mini models to a Core1 Duo, but it's still a Core1 not a Core2 - i.e., still crippled.

The other possible motive (for Apple) of keeping the Mini at Core1 is profit margin. When the Core2 came out, Intel slashed the price of the Core1, but Apple has not dropped the price of the Mini. If Apple had a big stock of Core1 processors (especially Core1 Duos) when the Core2 came out (not likely given how shrewd Apple often is), this gives them a way to flush their Core1 inventory. More likely, Apple is just making bank on the reduced cost of the inputs.

So, I can see a few reasons why Apple may not bump the Mini to a Core2 very soon. I hope I'm wrong it because I'd really like a Core2 Mini. The MacWorld release timeframe that is being rumored would fit my budget very nicely.

enjoy,
Charles.