So it looks like we've won. All the ranting, petitions and articles finally paid off. I have to say, after 4 years, I did not expect this coming now, especially as Apple hasn't been selling Mac's with 3rd party SATA bays for a long time.
Updates are coming to Trim Enabler and Disk Sensei to take advantage of the Apple sanctioned way of enabling Trim. We're finally going to get Trim on the Mac without compromising system security or stability.
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.
El Capitan and TRIM Support
- Thread starter CheMillan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Umm what now?
No, unless otherwise configured, sudo and su will default to running the command as root. Both are equally "reliable and/or powerful".
The main differences are that su needs to be run once and all following commands will be as superuser, whereas with sudo, each command needs to be prefixed with "sudo", arguably making it a lot safer.
The other main difference is that with sudo I can limit or specify which commands the user can run as root which makes it more flexible and potentially more secure as this is in line with the security principle of providing the least privilege necessary (why give you access to run all commands as root when you only need to run one command as root to do your job). Almost all systems default to ALL, allowing a sudoer to run any command as root.
Last edited:
Thanks, the reason for the question is this. In years past while working in Linux, I've found that while trying to execute a particular operation using CLI, sudo would fail at times. However upon tiring of the sudo fails, I would then use SU and find success. This leaving me to feel that SU is a more powerful or brute force mode with elevated privileges. It doesn't feel equally powerful when one is llimited or restricted to specific operations, and the other provides unrestricted or elevated command processing.
I fully understand that both provide root access, but sudo seems to exclude some command operations where SU dose not.
Based on this knowledge, do you really think the question was that goofy? I was basically asking if SU had the brute force strength to change system files that sudo is restricted from.
My point... You could have just said no, SU doesn't provide elevated privileges for that particular type of operation.
I fully understand that both provide root access, but sudo seems to exclude some command operations where SU dose not.
Based on this knowledge, do you really think the question was that goofy? I was basically asking if SU had the brute force strength to change system files that sudo is restricted from.
My point... You could have just said no, SU doesn't provide elevated privileges for that particular type of operation.
Last edited:
It sounds like you were working on a system which had restricted what commands you could run with sudo. It makes no sense to work like this because they didn't lock down su as well.
I agree, but that's why I asked the question if something similar was possible with Cappy.
With OS X the only difference in the default configuration will be that sudo is safer because you need to actively invoke it each time you want elevated privilege. With su you run the risk of forgetting you are superuser and doing something silly.
Code:
sudo nvram boot-args="rootless=0"
reboot
Code:
sudo trimforce enableTry it. Problem solved.
Yes they plan to remove rootless=0 boot argument before the final release. That just means you'll have to use Apple's official method as below;
1 - Boot into the recovery partition, and use the new Security Configuration menu tool to turn off rootless; (Utilities > Security Configuration > Enforce System Integrity Protection)
2 - Reboot to desktop and open a terminal session3 - Enter the command "sudo trimforce enable"
4 - Press the enter key and follow all the prompts, and agree to the terms
5 - Reboot into the recovery partition and turn rootless back on again
6 - Boot to the normal desktop and enjoy trim on all of your SSDs
Last edited:
Ah, thanks. I had used Safari to seek the word timsutton in that topic; it wasn't found. Now I find the name, Tim Sutton.
There's https://forums.developer.apple.com/people/timsutton however, from what I recall of the new approach, prior developer program members are discouraged from using a real/recognisable name as the username when regaining privileged access to Apple Developer Forums. It's reasonable to assume that people/timsutton is the person whose true name is Tim Sutton, but for the Apple Developer Programs user I see nothing more than "0 points • Level 1" so without you telling me, I can't be sure.
Don't bother then. Apple has never officially supported non apple hardware and never will.
EDIT: It seems there is an unofficial way of doing it, but it's still a kludge.
Last edited:
I hope the opprobrium of the MR forum won’t be heaped upon me as a newbie, but what’s the great advantage in enabling TRIM on a third-party drive ?
I have two iMacs both running 10.10.3. The late ’09 27-inch was upgraded with a Crucial M550 512GB SSD; the late 2014 5K has the BTO 512GB flash upgrade. I’ve not noticed any decrease in performance in the former since I swapped out the HD nine months ago, even though TRIM isn’t supported. BlackMagic Read/Write results are identical. Boot time is the same as the day I first powered up the SSD (within two seconds, a slowdown that’s probably attributable to startup registering the 3 USB external backup drives now hanging out of the back).
So one of my Macs has TRIM enabled, the other not. I can’t tell any difference. Am I being dim or realistic ?
I have two iMacs both running 10.10.3. The late ’09 27-inch was upgraded with a Crucial M550 512GB SSD; the late 2014 5K has the BTO 512GB flash upgrade. I’ve not noticed any decrease in performance in the former since I swapped out the HD nine months ago, even though TRIM isn’t supported. BlackMagic Read/Write results are identical. Boot time is the same as the day I first powered up the SSD (within two seconds, a slowdown that’s probably attributable to startup registering the 3 USB external backup drives now hanging out of the back).
So one of my Macs has TRIM enabled, the other not. I can’t tell any difference. Am I being dim or realistic ?
Last edited:
^^^^You may want to read this:
http://solid-state-drive-review.toptenreviews.com/what-is-trim-support.html
Lou
http://solid-state-drive-review.toptenreviews.com/what-is-trim-support.html
Lou
Thanks Lou, but I get the feeling my 2009 iMac will have expired from other causes long before lack of TRIM support affects the drive. As I say, absolutely no noticeable degradation in nine months. Within four years the iMac will be ten years old and I doubt I’ll be using it. Or Apple will have allowed a third-party manufacturer to issue a fix.
Even if I do start to suffer the problems described in the article, can’t I just reformat the SSD and copy back yesterday’s cloned backup ?
Maybe this affects power users at the cutting edge, but to an average user it doesn’t seem a problem (at least, not from the evidence so far).
PS: Having just read all the anti-TRIM sentiment on MR Forums here, I’m quite glad I don’t have TRIM enabled on my Crucial SSD...
Last edited:
You don't need to do that. You can just enable TRIM then boot to single user mode and run the command "fsck -fy" and that will TRIM unused blocks on the drive and restore performance.
So that's the reason Apple tried to disallow third party SSD Trim utilization! Huh, and they wanted folks to screw up and slowdown Apple branded SSDs.
Lou
Does this method stick, once set, to leave rootless off in the same way the "rootless=0" command did? Or does it go back to rootless on after reboot again?
The theory is that you can activate rootless security once again after doing whatever it was you deactivated rootless security to begin with. Whatever changes were made in the interim should stick. That includes trimforce.
Thanks Weaselboy
You mean all I have to do in Yosemite is go to Terminal and enter the command
"sudo trimforce enable”
quit Terminal, then reboot in single user and run "fsck -fy” ?
As easy as that ?
(Sorry, but I did say I was a newbie !)
This thread is about El Capitan, not Yosemite. The sort of command you mention (trimforce) works in El Capitan. It hasn't been implemented in the Yosemite 10.10.4 latest downloadable beta yet, so, no, it won't work in Yosemite (at least for now).
