An open community 
of Macintosh users,
for Macintosh users.

FineTunedMac Dashboard widget now available! Download Here

Topic Options
#53164 - 12/20/19 12:57 AM Activity Monitor broken?
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
I just upgraded to Catalina 10.15.2, and my Activity Monitor window looks like this despite the checked off columns.
  1. I tried to reinstall AM with Pacifist, but it's in System and is locked.
  2. I extracted AM to my desktop...same problem.
  3. I d/l'ed a fresh Catalina installer.
  4. Same as 2.
  5. For the heck of it I ran the 10.15.2 combo Updater.
  6. Same as 2.
Am I alone in this?

DAMN! I hate this new System/Data setup & lockdown. It can't be overcome by disabling SIP & sudo combined and is a major PIA!!!
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53165 - 12/20/19 01:30 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
jchuzi Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
I'm don't see this in my 10.15.2 installation. The only suggestion that I can make is to reset your home folder permissions. If you have TechToolPro, you can more easily do it from there via its Tools tab .
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.15.4, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#53166 - 12/20/19 01:46 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: jchuzi]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Well, it was worth a try. frown

Thanks for the thought.

(I reinstalled 10.15.2, gave Activity Monitor full disk access, and repaired home folder permissions...all with no joy.)
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53167 - 12/20/19 02:05 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: jchuzi]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Hah! Googled the problem, and it turned out to be nothing more than a corrupt plist.

Don't know why I never think of Google until after I've wasted an inordinate amount of time taking pot shots in the dark. crazy
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53168 - 12/20/19 02:52 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
jchuzi Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
grin
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.15.4, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#53171 - 12/20/19 08:00 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: artie505
DAMN! I hate this new System/Data setup & lockdown. It can't be overcome by disabling SIP & sudo combined and is a major PIA!!!

Imagine my surprise when I attempted to boot my new 2018 Mac mini from a CCC clone only to be told it could not be booted from an external drive! It turns out that is a T2 chip thing that can only be changed when booted from the Recovery Drive and for some changes you also have to be logged onto the internet. In the process of troubleshooting a couple of issues with the new Mac mini I am booting into the Recovery Drive several times a day just to tweak the security settings. It is annoying, but not nearly as annoying as getting hacked would be. Security, like freedom, isn’t free.
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#53185 - 12/20/19 09:51 PM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Originally Posted By: artie505
DAMN! I hate this new System/Data setup & lockdown. It can't be overcome by disabling SIP & sudo combined and is a major PIA!!!

Imagine my surprise when I attempted to boot my new 2018 Mac mini from a CCC clone only to be told it could not be booted from an external drive!

I've run into an equal but opposite issue.

In OSs prior to Catalina, CCC could create a bootable clone of your boot volume in another volume in the same container if SIP was disabled, and a complete, but non-bootable, one if it was enabled. In Catalina, because of a negative interaction between SIP and Apple's new System/Data scheme, even a complete non-bootable clone is impossible. (Mike Bombich is hoping it's a bug that Apple will take care of, but he's not certain). And even if it's possible to turn the trick with SIP disabled, I'd bet that there aren't enough users running in that state to justify the time investment.

(I maintain a clone on external drive, but I like an onboard clone because my desk is small, and my external is in a drawer other than when I'm running a CCC task.)

Originally Posted By: joemikeb
...not nearly as annoying as getting hacked would be. Security, like freedom, isn’t free.

I can't argue with that, but do you think Apple's locking down /Apps & /Apps/Utilities so unnecessary ones can't be culled really contributes to security? (I'd love to get rid of 19 + at least 3, respectively.)
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53190 - 12/21/19 08:10 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: artie505
In OSs prior to Catalina, CCC could create a bootable clone of your boot volume in another volume in the same container if SIP was disabled, and a complete, but non-bootable, one if it was enabled. In Catalina, because of a negative interaction between SIP and Apple's new System/Data scheme, even a complete non-bootable clone is impossible. (Mike Bombich is hoping it's a bug that Apple will take care of, but he's not certain). And even if it's possible to turn the trick with SIP disabled, I'd bet that there aren't enough users running in that state to justify the time investment.

In my case it is not CCC that is the culprit, rather it is the T2 chip which has a setting that prevents booting the computer from ANY external drive. That setting can be changed by booting into the Recovery Drive and launching Utilities from the menu bar.

FYI I am running CCC 5.1.15b1 (5890) which offers a completely new cloning methodology called a "Full Clone" and is based on APFS, Snapshots, and a command in Catalina. It does not use any of CCC's old technology and the target drive is erased every time. I tried it for the first time today and to my amazement it took somewhere between three (3) and five (5) minutes to clone the recovery drive, the system volume and the data volume to an external TB3 connected SSD. (admittedly the external SSD is really fast but less than five minutes!!!!)

Originally Posted By: artie505
I can't argue with that, but do you think Apple's locking down /Apps & /Apps/Utilities so unnecessary ones can't be culled really contributes to security? (I'd love to get rid of 19 + at least 3, respectively.)

I am not sure what you are referring to. Other than some Apple Apps and Utilities that are used elsewhere in MacOS and/or other Apps I have no problem deleting apps and utilities such as Mail in MacOS 10.15.3. All that takes is entering an admin password when prompted which I take as an "are you sure" step. That is unchanged from OS X 10.0. If you are referring to Catalina's write only system volume it contains the actual system kernel and support code that has never been deletable in the past. Putting it in a read only volume simply adds an additional layer to hide the code from hackers and the ignorant and make it much more difficult for them to damage. Applications, preference files, application support, users, etc are all in the DATA volume.


Edited by joemikeb (12/21/19 09:26 AM)
Edit Reason: add CCC comment
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#53198 - 12/21/19 04:51 PM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Originally Posted By: artie505
In OSs prior to Catalina, CCC could create a bootable clone of your boot volume in another volume in the same container if SIP was disabled, and a complete, but non-bootable, one if it was enabled. In Catalina, because of a negative interaction between SIP and Apple's new System/Data scheme, even a complete non-bootable clone is impossible.

In my case it is not CCC that is the culprit....

According to Mike Bombich, CCC isn't the culprit...

Originally Posted By: Mike
The reason those items are excluded from the backup task in the screenshot, though, is that the destination is a volume in the same container as the current startup disk. CCC has to exclude system files from that task, otherwise you'll run into thousands of SIP-related errors. That's new in Catalina, and I'm hoping it's a bug that Apple intends to fix. SIP protection should be limited to the current startup disk, not additional volumes in the same container.

Originally Posted By: joemikeb
FYI I am running CCC 5.1.15b1 (5890)....

I installed it today after reading your post; it sounds fascinating.

Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Originally Posted By: artie505
I can't argue with that, but do you think Apple's locking down /Apps & /Apps/Utilities so unnecessary ones can't be culled really contributes to security? (I'd love to get rid of 19 + at least 3, respectively.)

I am not sure what you are referring to. Other than some Apple Apps and Utilities that are used elsewhere in MacOS and/or other Apps I have no problem deleting apps and utilities such as Mail in MacOS 10.15.3. (Emphasis added)

Not so in 10.15.2, though. (Hmmm... I think that's the first formatted link I've ever seen.)

Apple has apparently seen the error in their ways; I guess I'm not the only one who was upset. smile
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53205 - 12/24/19 01:40 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: artie505
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
FYI I am running CCC 5.1.15b1 (5890)....

I installed it today after reading your post; it sounds fascinating.

Originally Posted By: joemike
FYI I am running CCC 5.1.15b1 (5890) which offers a completely new cloning methodology called a "Full Clone" and is based on APFS, Snapshots, and a command in Catalina. It does not use any of CCC's old technology and the target drive is erased every time.

I couldn't find that on the CCC website; please post a link.

In my instance, 5.1.15 takes about 15% less time to complete a basic "Copy All Files" clone than 5.1.14 did.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53206 - 12/24/19 04:08 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: artie505
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Originally Posted By: artie505
In OSs prior to Catalina, CCC could create a bootable clone of your boot volume in another volume in the same container if SIP was disabled, and a complete, but non-bootable, one if it was enabled. In Catalina, because of a negative interaction between SIP and Apple's new System/Data scheme, even a complete non-bootable clone is impossible.

In my case it is not CCC that is the culprit....

According to Mike Bombich, CCC isn't the culprit...

If you're the curious sort, compare a CCC clone of your boot volume to another volume in the same container and the same SD! clone.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53210 - 12/24/19 06:48 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: artie505
I couldn't find that on the CCC website; please post a link.

As far as I know it is not mentioned on their web site. I found it in the app. Note the version number I am using is CCC 5.1.15b1 (5890), as in beta version, and in the app it is flagged as a beta feature. Presumably It will be coming to a release version when Mike is confident there are no bugs. Certainly it has worked on my Mac to create extremely accurate clones — in fact more like a mirror than a conventional clone — very rapidly.

The "documentation", if you can call it that, was entirely contained in a popup the first time I selected "Full Clone (Beta)" as the backup method. Because I imprudently clicked "don't show this again" I can't even get back to the popup to read it again 🤬 There was more information in the popup about snapshots that I really want to take a longer look at. ❓❓❓
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#53221 - 12/27/19 11:16 PM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
The "documentation", if you can call it that, was entirely contained in a popup the first time I selected "Full Clone (Beta)" as the backup method. Because I imprudently clicked "don't show this again" I can't even get back to the popup to read it again 🤬 There was more information in the popup about snapshots that I really want to take a longer look at. ❓❓❓

I don't remember seeing that pop-up, but Performing a Full Volume Clone via Apple Software Restore (Beta) is probably what you're looking for.

I'm actually one (unreleased) build ahead of you with CCC 5.1.15b1 (5891), which enables bootable clones of your boot volume in another volume in the same container if SIP is disabled.

Talk about fast? A Full Clone clone of my ~25 GB boot volume takes ~1 minute 5 seconds whereas a Copy All Files clone takes ~3 minutes 55 seconds! (And incremental updates sound like lightning!) smile
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53223 - 12/28/19 01:15 PM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: artie505
...but Performing a Full Volume Clone via Apple Software Restore (Beta) is probably what you're looking for.[/url]

It is and thanks. I have now captured it into my DevonThink Knowledge Base database.

Originally Posted By: artie505
I'm actually one (unreleased) build ahead of you with CCC 5.1.15b1 (5891), which enables bootable clones of your boot volume in another volume in the same container if SIP is disabled.

Same release, different build. The automatic updater triggers on the release ID, not the build number so I can't convince it that I am "out of date".

On the other hand I am not inclined to have multiple clones on the same physical device. Instead I have a few inexpensive (a.k.a. cheap) or repurposed HDs to use for any sort of "versioned" clones. The one exception I can think of would be to have a drive with clones of multiple computers.

In fact, I am considering that very thing as concomitant part of a general reconfiguration of the systems here. I will be using a 2TB HD for the clones but I am debating on whether to partition the drive or rely entirely on APFS volumes.

I did a Full Clone to a volume on a multivolume APFS drive and to my surprise the Recovery Drive, System Volume and Data Volume were added without changing the other volume on the drive, in spite of the warning the destination would be completely erased. I am try to envision how the various recovery, system and data volumes would be associated with one another.

QUESTIONS:
  • Have you attempted creating multiple bootable clones in the same APFS Container?
  • If so, did you use Full Clone (beta) or the Copy All Files option?
  • How were the different Recovery Drives Handled?

Originally Posted By: artie505
Talk about fast? A Full Clone clone of my ~25 GB boot volume takes ~1 minute 5 seconds whereas a Copy All Files clone takes ~3 minutes 55 seconds! (And incremental updates sound like lightning!) smile

I am amazed at how fast the data can be moved when all of the file handling rigamarole is eliminated. It is a dramatic demonstration of how much processing overhead and read/write overhead is involved in file management. Couple that with NVMe devices and WOW!
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#53226 - 12/29/19 12:41 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
The automatic updater triggers on the release ID, not the build number so I can't convince it that I am "out of date".

You're not out of date; I got (5891) directly from Mike, and although I don't think it will be an independent build release, its new functionality will be included in the next one.

Originally Posted By: joemikeb
On the other hand I am not inclined to have multiple clones on the same physical device.

I've always maintained a clone of my boot volume on my internal drive in order to have one handy when my external is in the drawer (as it usually is because of space limitations), not as a critical part of my backup scheme, but APFS and, irrelevantly, Full Clone have made it possible to run with a Full Clone clone in my boot container, and a Copy All Data clone in a separate container...sort of an "internal external." (*)

Originally Posted By: joemikeb
I did a Full Clone to a volume on a multivolume APFS drive and to my surprise the Recovery Drive, System Volume and Data Volume were added without changing the other volume on the drive, in spite of the warning the destination would be completely erased. I am try to envision how the various recovery, system and data volumes would be associated with one another.

The "destination" in this instance isn't the container, rather it's the particular volume to which you're cloning. Or at least that's what innumerable clones have taught me.

Originally Posted By: joemikeb
QUESTIONS:
  • Have you attempted creating multiple bootable clones in the same APFS Container?
  • If so, did you use Full Clone (beta) or the Copy All Files option?
  • How were the different Recovery Drives Handled?

I ran an extra clone in order to respond, and I"ve now got a Full Clone clone and a Copy All Files clone in the same container as my boot volume; I've booted into both without running into any issues, but to be honest, I didn't do much experimentation.

I'm not sure what your Recovery Drive question actually is; please clarify. (I'm sure you've seen this.)

Is this responsive?

Code:
Last login: Sun Dec 29 04:54:17 on ttys000
artie@Artie's-MacBook-Pro-2 ~ % diskutil list
/dev/disk0 (internal, physical):
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *500.3 GB   disk0
   1:                        EFI EFI                     209.7 MB   disk0s1
   2:                 Apple_APFS Container disk1         450.1 GB   disk0s2
   3:                 Apple_APFS Container disk2         50.0 GB    disk0s3

/dev/disk1 (synthesized):
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      APFS Container Scheme -                      +450.1 GB   disk1
                                 Physical Store disk0s2
   1:                APFS Volume Artie's MBP             417.8 KB   disk1s1
   2:                APFS Volume HD - Data               17.0 GB    disk1s2
   3:                APFS Volume HD2                     236.7 GB   disk1s3
   4:                APFS Volume HDw                     442.4 KB   disk1s4
   5:                APFS Volume HDx                     442.4 KB   disk1s5
   6:                APFS Volume HDz - Data              14.6 GB    disk1s7
   7:                APFS Volume HD                      10.5 GB    disk1s8
   8:                APFS Volume Preboot                 160.0 MB   disk1s9
   9:                APFS Volume Recovery                1.1 GB     disk1s10
  10:                APFS Volume VM                      1.1 GB     disk1s11
  11:                APFS Volume HDz                     10.5 GB    disk1s12
  12:                APFS Volume HDy                     749.6 KB   disk1s13

/dev/disk2 (synthesized):
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      APFS Container Scheme -                      +50.0 GB    disk2
                                 Physical Store disk0s3
   1:                APFS Volume CCC - Data              14.5 GB    disk2s1
   2:                APFS Volume CCC                     10.5 GB    disk2s2
   3:                APFS Volume Preboot                 80.0 MB    disk2s3
   4:                APFS Volume Recovery                528.5 MB   disk2s4
   5:                APFS Volume VM                      1.1 GB     disk2s5

/dev/disk3 (external, physical):
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *480.1 GB   disk3
   1:                        EFI EFI                     209.7 MB   disk3s1
   2:                 Apple_APFS Container disk4         479.9 GB   disk3s2

/dev/disk4 (synthesized):
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      APFS Container Scheme -                      +479.9 GB   disk4
                                 Physical Store disk3s2
   1:                APFS Volume OWC Elite Pro mini      659.5 KB   disk4s1
   2:                APFS Volume HDa - Data              14.5 GB    disk4s2
   3:                APFS Volume HDwa                    17.1 GB    disk4s4
   4:                APFS Volume HDxa                    21.7 GB    disk4s5
   5:                APFS Volume HDya                    622.6 KB   disk4s6
   6:                APFS Volume HD2a                    236.0 GB   disk4s7
   7:                APFS Volume Preboot                 200.7 MB   disk4s8
   8:                APFS Volume Recovery                2.1 GB     disk4s9
   9:                APFS Volume VM                      1.1 GB     disk4s10
  10:                APFS Volume HDa                     10.5 GB    disk4s11
  11:                APFS Volume HDza                    1.1 MB     disk4s12

artie@Artie's-MacBook-Pro-2 ~ % 

(*) I'm sure you've noticed how complicated writing about APFS is as respects disks, volumes, containers, and partitions. And trying to discuss pre and post APFS in the same sentence is a nightmare.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#53228 - 12/29/19 08:42 AM Re: Activity Monitor broken? [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
You answered my question and I agree that talking about pre and post APFS in the same sentence is a true challenge. Even more mind bending to me are the Recovery and Preboot partition volumes. But apparently through the "magic" of virtualization anything is possible. I am going to have to spend more time wrapping my head around all of this.
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top

Moderator:  alternaut, dianne, dkmarsh