whould'nt downloading the update from apple's site rather than software
update sort that out as you wont have the SUID warnings in the first place
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.
Mac OS X 10.5.2 Not Quite Ready Yet (9C30 Seeded)
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
whould'nt downloading the update from apple's site rather than software
update sort that out as you wont have the SUID warnings in the first place
I hope this update fixes my problems with Aperture. It randomly quits on me. 
Although I know it's Aperture that really needs the update. OS update probably wont do much.
Although I know it's Aperture that really needs the update. OS update probably wont do much.
And yet when Apple fanboys make the EXACT SAME POST (except moving from Vista -> Leopard) they are heralded as "heros," "speaking the truth," etc.
Maybe that happens, but the "Vista" guy (with 1 post) really was being a troll. That part was obvious.
Oh, was it? Did you happen to read any other posts I put down in earlier today?
Glad they're taking their time, but they seem to be taking their time with everything everyone is screaming for (this, MBP). Just get it out sometime soon and let it improve stability and such and I'll be a happy camper. I've re-installed Leopard once already, don't want to do it again. I'm staying at 10.5.0 until this update comes out because 5.1 completely trashed my iMac.
I really hope they release this soon cause they are supposed to release the new mbp at the same time.
Yes, Trollzilla.
1. "I mean Apple sucks and as I see it Vista a WAY better then Leopard is right now."
2. "You are killing me wakerider017 just killing me..." (this is the ENTIRE reply.)
3. "You silly Mac fools and your 'it just works' attitude"... ("You" implies that you are not one of the group you are addressing.)
4. "My point exactly." (Entire reply.)
And then 5, this post.
TROLL!
Attachments
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 6.9) VZW:SCH-i760 PPC 240x320)
Yes, but I've got the the safer bet.
If even one person reports a problem with 10.5.2 - then it's not "flawless" and you look like a silly fanboi.
BRLawyer said:
Please do, I will remember you bookmarked it anyway...just don't complain about the backlash afterwards...
Yes, but I've got the the safer bet.
If even one person reports a problem with 10.5.2 - then it's not "flawless" and you look like a silly fanboi.
...I took it as clever sarcasm, thanks eauh...
I think there is only one person on this entire thread that can actually spot some dry humor when they see it.
lol
When i first read your post about how much better vista was, i thought 'what is this dudes problem' then when i read it again to check i was seeing things correctly i thought that there was no way it could be genuine.
(... i only made the switch from vista to leopard a few months ago!)
Most of them don't. A large amount of code in Leopard has both PPC and Intel 32-bit code, but only some parts of the system also include 64-bit code (Apache is one example I've found). Some will be PPC-only or Intel-only, e.g. drivers for hardware which only exists on one processor family.
There is almost no G3 support in Leopard at all. The oldest supported architecture for most code is "ppc7400" (G4). For example, Address Book contains G4 and i386 code. Only applications which can run on earlier systems (e.g. iTunes) are still built with G3-compatible code.
Certain applications which benefit from SSE4 might justify creating a separate code architecture, but I expect most will take advantage of it through common frameworks, or writing alternate versions of functions and calling the one optimised for SSE4 if appropriate.
There are only two Mac models released with Penryn so far (Mac Pro and MacBook Air), so I expect very little code prior to 10.5.2 will be written to take advantage of SSE4.
Look at the size of PPC vs Intel updates for 10.4: the Intel ones are generally in the order of double the size of the PPC ones. The larger updates are mainly due to containing two architectures for everything: 10.4 Intel updates include PPC code for Rosetta, 10.4 PPC updates are PPC only.
If an increasing number of files in Leopard have more than two architectures, this could account for a "more than doubling" effect, but I'd expect this to be a small proportion of the total.
10.4.11 Intel combo update (which includes both PPC and Intel code) is 321 MB. This is a fairer point of comparison to Leopard's universal updates.
Not necessarily. Leopard may also contain more than two architectures: some code is compiled for 64-bit execution (G5 plus x86_64), so that would double the size of the update again for that code.
10.5.2 is being released after models which use the Penryn generation of Intel processors, which include a much enhanced SSE4 instruction set, and this may justify a lot of code being recompiled to take advantage of those instructions for added performance. This might mean some applications have another one or two architectures, or even just larger Intel code due to having both SSE3 and SSE4 variants.
One other factor which hasn't been considered here: the developer test builds of 10.5.2 might have extra debugging code turned on, or additional diagnostic information such as symbol tables. The general release won't include this, which would allow it to be substantially smaller. I don't know whether this has already been done for the current seeds.
Also worth noting that with 10.5.1, Software Update supplied a smaller variant which patched the existing files rather than replacing them. This will mean that everyone who uses Software Update will get a much more reasonably sized 10.5.2 update. The manually downloaded delta or combo updates will be much bigger.
Oops. Make that one model then.
Just emphasises the point further. There was no point in the 10.5.1 update including SSE4 code as no Macs released prior to that could use it.
The 10.5.2 update may include SSE4 code for the Mac Pro, as well as any imminent MacBook Pro and not-too-far-away iMac updates, but I think it is too soon, especially if the development tools haven't caught up yet.
SSE4 is more likely to start appearing in later 10.5.x updates (and increase the size of those updates accordingly), but it may be limited to a small subset of the files which can get a significant performance boost from SSE4.
Thanks for the useful information, but my reply was sarcasm in response to TPALTony's claim in reply 126 that there was a factor of 4 stretch due to fat binaries.
Tuesdays and Fridays??
When does Apple generally add updates. Have they ever done it on a Monday, Wed or Thur? I excited about Leopard 10.5.2 and I hate waiting for this update. I just want to be up-to-date and I'm getting frustrated. I really think I have a problem becuase I'm the same way with my iPhone. I'm already sick of 1.1.3 haha. SOMEONE HELPPPP ME!!!!!
When does Apple generally add updates. Have they ever done it on a Monday, Wed or Thur? I excited about Leopard 10.5.2 and I hate waiting for this update. I just want to be up-to-date and I'm getting frustrated. I really think I have a problem becuase I'm the same way with my iPhone. I'm already sick of 1.1.3 haha. SOMEONE HELPPPP ME!!!!!
I posted a detailed message on this earlier in this thread. There have been OS X updates released on every day of the week, including one on a Saturday and one on a Sunday. The bulk of the updates have come on Monday through Thursday, with none of those days being favored much over the others.