Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Revised macOS Big Sur 11.2.1 Update Properly Checks Free Available Space to Prevent Installation Errors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
EDIT. @now i see it I said we were on dialup at the time, but even so the OS was not nearly as complex as before so it's understandable that the OS was 650MB. I hope you realize that the 35GB is the available space required and Apple made it very clear years back that the system will not accept installs once the storage space falls below 25GB. The system needs space to run and swap files and manage memory.
Just a small oversight. The Big Sur team was busy developing ways to screw with the batteries. Priorities!
This recently happened on a friend’s computer when they tried to update their MBP to Big Sur with way less than 35gb available. SSD was one of those generous 125gb ones Apple likes to install so you can imagine not much space left.
Anyway, the install goes sideways and fails and the computer can not be restarted. Attempting to access the ssd via Internet Recovery or Target Mode fails as with FileVault turned on there became a mismatch somewhere and it wouldn’t accept the FV password. Even Apple support could not figure it out. Solution was to delete the <Macintosh HD> partition (not the Data partition) using Disk Utility while connected in Target Mode. Once deleted the partition automagically gets recreated and then when you try and mount <Macintosh HD-Data> it accepts the password and you can mount the data drive and recover your files. You still have to install Big Sur from scratch as a clean install but you do save your data.
Credit for this goes to Kyle Kukshtel and it worked like a charm. https://blog.kylekukshtel.com/big-sur-update-failing-diskutil-apfs-filevault-sync-users
Anyway, the install goes sideways and fails and the computer can not be restarted. Attempting to access the ssd via Internet Recovery or Target Mode fails as with FileVault turned on there became a mismatch somewhere and it wouldn’t accept the FV password. Even Apple support could not figure it out. Solution was to delete the <Macintosh HD> partition (not the Data partition) using Disk Utility while connected in Target Mode. Once deleted the partition automagically gets recreated and then when you try and mount <Macintosh HD-Data> it accepts the password and you can mount the data drive and recover your files. You still have to install Big Sur from scratch as a clean install but you do save your data.
Credit for this goes to Kyle Kukshtel and it worked like a charm. https://blog.kylekukshtel.com/big-sur-update-failing-diskutil-apfs-filevault-sync-users
Last edited:
issue fixing is a good thing, but in the past 6 months or o Apple released a lot of "fixes" that a good QA team would have never let go through, and a good QA team uses a combination of set scripts as well as human testing.
Examples:
. this thread: checking available disk space required for an update should have NEVER slipped through
. Safari 14.02 for Mojave disabled "attach file" (this was not fixed til 14.03 ~ 6 weeks later
. there were numerous iOS updates
you can find reports on all of these here in MR
Apple SW QA is not doing the best job right now, that simple
This does seem concerning. It's the equivalent of a manager of a retail establishment forgetting to unlock the store doors at the start of business or forgetting to lock them after closing shop and going home. It's that basic.
I wonder how many software QA engineers here have worked on an operating system project similar in scope and complexity to Big Sur?
The more I think about how bad every OS has been since Snow Leopard, the more I grow angrier at Apple trying to screw everyone.. Big Sur is garbage compared to the older OS’s, I was wrong - Catalina is like Windows 10 where as Big Sur(dumb name) is like Vista. I prefer cat names again.. that’s the Apple I miss.
Agree with both you. My guess is that this is not a standard test case (unless changes are made) and changes were made to the area...and generic test cases didn't cover this. Hence, a miss. Or they simply didn't do their job. I'll assume the former and some corner case was missed that makes installer not check. But, if not, checking space is generic installer code. Most companies don't have the resources to test very single case or automate everyone. But, it's Apple so...
Yeah, I guess I feel that way when comes to the betas. But, I have had a good experience with Big Sur. Better than Catalina. But, after Betas. The Betas have been pretty bad since the cats. I mean, full on losing OS and have to go to backups on just upgrades. No way is this Vista quality. XP and Vista were the worst quality Windows OS I have used. At least for me. Then agian, maybe I'm getting used to bugs. I guess I do cross my fingers on upgrades now. Don't remember doing this before.
Am I in the minority in really not liking the new OS look? I thought I'd get used to it, but if anything I dislike it more now than I did when it was first revealed.
So what you're saying is Apple has no room for mistakes right? Are they not made up of humans? Would you agree that Microsoft makes zero mistakes with Windows 10?
I wonder how many people experience 100% perfection 100% of the time with respect to systems where humans are involved.
As an aside, gravitational force has demonstrated a pretty good success rate, over 14 billion years. Something I can count on today.
Agreed! I'm definitely seeing a great deal of armchair software QA engineers here acting as if Apple has zero room for mistakes while pretending that Apple is the only one that has issues. I wonder if Windows 10 has any issues that Microsoft has allowed to slip through the cracks? Nah, according to this forum of armchair QA engineers here only Apple makes mistakes.
Also I find it interesting how many people are acting like this is some firestorm. The OS update just came out a week ago. I think Apple acknowledging and correcting the issue after just one week is damn good. I wonder if Microsoft would've acted so quickly? Hmm. 😂
There may be a number of armchair software QA engineers here, but I'm not one of them. I served as QA director for four different software companies.
If I had signed off an installer that failed to check for available drive space and left our users’ data inaccessible, I would have expected to lose my job.
I fell victim to this issue last week. Finally found my “box of random cables” hoping to have a thunderbolt cable hiding, but no... just every other cable imaginable. Now I get to spend 30 bucks on a cable that I’ll only use one time to connect my MacBook to iMac to get out of this install error cycle.
I agree you shouldn't have had to do that. On the bright side. you are prepared for any future Configurator 2 needs with the M1.
I don't think they quite managed to "slipstream" the different architectures (ARM + x86_64) into the updates yet. I think the updates contain both architectures and that is why it is so big. I think in the future when all Macs are ARM-only, the updates will get back to being more reasonably sized.
You can always return it within the 14-day window and get that $$$ back...
Nope. I loathe it. First time since the first OS X release I won’t be updating my systems. It doesn’t help that Apple is rushing out annual releases. When I worked with head of engineering Bertrand serlet on 10.4 through 10.6 we had to wipe our systems every two weeks with a new beta during two to three-year development stages before releasing a new OS - And this was during the PowerPC to Intel transition. Now Apple is transitioning to ARM systems while trying to maintain Intel systems with an overhauled UI. Even iPadOS 14 is a mess. That UI on a desktop system is a washed out bag of hurt.
That's not at all what I'm saying, read my post again ... the QA team is not doing their job, that simple, disabling g file upload in a new version of a browser?" come on ...