OOPS . . . I hope I didn't confuse him.
Just to clarify, are you not offering the final release on your web page, dosdude1? I recall that you had a link for megadownload, or somewhere like that.
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.
macOS 10.12 Sierra Unsupported Macs Thread
- Thread starter redheeler
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
OOPS . . . I hope I didn't confuse him.
Just to clarify, are you not offering the final release on your web page, dosdude1? I recall that you had a link for megadownload, or somewhere like that.
Above option 5, you did read: "Note: Only perform steps 5 and 6 if you intend to do a clean install. Otherwise, you can simply skip these steps and install to your volume containg a previous version of OS X, and it'll do an in-place upgrade."
You can do an upgraded install or you can format the "drive". In your case, you need to be very careful to just format the logical partition that encapsulates your volume group. If you format either of the physical drives, you'll mess up your logical partition.
I can never seem to get this stuff to work the first time around. I tried @foxlet AUS tool. I get "No Updates Available" in MAS. Even tried issuing the proper commands in the Terminal and get "No new software available." And also tried clicking to download Sierra in the MAS and I get "This version of macOS 10.12 cannot be installed on this computer."
Looking at network activity shows that it's talking to swdist.furcode.co
Help?
I'm on a MBP 15" mid-2009.
Looking at network activity shows that it's talking to swdist.furcode.co
Help?
I'm on a MBP 15" mid-2009.
Just follow the first part of my guide to download Sierra using my tool: http://dosdude1.com/sierrapatch.html
AUSEnabler is designed to be used to update to Sierra's minor versions (10.12.1 and so on). You won't get any updates because Apple hasn't published any yet to the production branch.
[doublepost=1475000878][/doublepost]
You're pretty much repeating this sentiment even though I haven't experienced any issues with Sierra personally. Of course a lot of it relies in knowing how the OS X installer works, and some who are unfamiliar may run into issues. When done properly, however, Sierra shouldn't have any issues running on these older Macs. (By the way, the Virtualbox USB Bug is now more broad and isn't specific to Sierra)
I might also note that upgrades seem to cause the most issues, and a lot of it can be rooted to the reworking of Sierra at a lower level (WindowServer, kernel) that makes upgrades far more unstable than clean installs (and is also not specific to having an older Mac).
Last edited:
CloudFlare acceleration is simply not going to be used. Flushing the cache defeats the point of using a cache in the first place. (And there is no maintained API to automate it, either).
Last edited:
Ha! I see that you updated your comment right after I read it and hit the "reply" button.
Yes, I was going to say that your statement isn't exactly accurate.
Foxlet, you know that I appreciate everything that you have done to help out everyone here. You have been very generous with your knowledge, skills and time.
However, it really needs to be made clear that even if one follows the instructions to the letter -- as I most certainly did -- things can still go wrong, both during the installation, as well as post installation, which are not due to user error at all.
For example, as you have now noted above, who could have foreseen that the VirtualBox kexts would cause a problem? That was not due to user error. It was due to Sierra running into something that it did not like. At least four people now have reported the very same camera issue, and I assume that there are others who are not even aware of this thread.
Sierra also broke another app which I use regularly -- and depend on --on a daily basis. So I think it would be more proper to say that even if done properly, Sierra may still have some issues, and it will break anything which stands in its path. Now that, in my view, is being realistic.
As I said, even if the end user does everything right and follows instructions to the letter, Sierra might still find something that it doesn't like -- a hardware or software configuration, for example -- during the installation process itself. There is simply no way to foresee this coming.
As I explained in detail in a private message to pkouame, my installation of 10.12.1 was going fine until the final eight remaining minutes. Then it ran into something which it apparently didn't like. I still have no idea what that was. But an hour later, it finally finished, and I ended up with a keyboard, Magic Mouse and wired mouse which would not work, so that I could not even log in, even though it was plain to see that the data was still on my hard drive. I later discovered that Sierra had also messed up my Mail mailboxes. Others reported the same thing in other threads I have read.
Again, this was not user error. This was ruthless Sierra pushing her weight around in order to make things the way she wanted them.
In conclusion, I stand by my statements. I think it is the responsible thing to do. People with older machines need to be made aware that if they are going to attempt to install Sierra on their machines, against Apple's own recommendations, it may go very well, it may go partially well, or it may bork their machine entirely.
I would rather be honest and clear about it, than paint a rosy picture for everyone. After all, they have a right to know what they are getting themselves into. They need to decide if the risk is worth taking.
Again, thanks for all that you have done. It has been a great help to many. But let's endeavor to present everyone with the full picture. 126 pages full of problems and challenges makes a loud statement in my book.
Ha! I see that you updated your comment right after I read it and hit the "reply" button.
Yes, I was going to say that your statement isn't exactly accurate.
Foxlet, you know that I appreciate everything that you have done to help out everyone here. You have been very generous with your knowledge, skills and time.
However, it really needs to be made clear that even if one follows the instructions to the letter -- as I most certainly did -- things can still go wrong, both during the installation, as well as post installation, which are not due to user error at all.
For example, as you have now noted above, who could have foreseen that the VirtualBox kexts would cause a problem? That was not due to user error. It was due to Sierra running into something that it did not like. At least four people now have reported the very same camera issue, and I assume that there are others who are not even aware of this thread.
Sierra also broke another app which I use regularly -- and depend on --on a daily basis. So I think it would be more proper to say that even if done properly, Sierra may still have some issues, and it will break anything which stands in its path. Now that, in my view, is being realistic.
As I said, even if the end user does everything right and follows instructions to the letter, Sierra might still find something that it doesn't like -- a hardware or software configuration, for example -- during the installation process itself. There is simply no way to foresee this coming.
As I explained in detail in a private message to pkouame, my installation of 10.12.1 was going fine until the final eight remaining minutes. Then it ran into something which it apparently didn't like. I still have no idea what that was. But an hour later, it finally finished, and I ended up with a keyboard, Magic Mouse and wired mouse which would not work, so that I could not even log in, even though it was plain to see that the data was still on my hard drive. I later discovered that Sierra had also messed up my Mail mailboxes. Others reported the same thing in other threads I have read.
Again, this was not user error. This was ruthless Sierra pushing her weight around in order to make things the way she wanted them.
In conclusion, I stand by my statements. I think it is the responsible thing to do. People with older machines need to be made aware that if they are going to attempt to install Sierra on their machines, against Apple's own recommendations, it may go very well, it may go partially well, or it may bork their machine entirely.
I would rather be honest and clear about it, than paint a rosy picture for everyone. After all, they have a right to know what they are getting themselves into. They need to decide if the risk is worth taking.
Again, thanks for all that you have done. It has been a great help to many. But let's endeavor to present everyone with the full picture. 126 pages full of problems and challenges makes a loud statement in my book.
The unfortunate thing is that problems will get far more reported than successes at any rate (Why post when everything went right?), and that bias can make it seem like Sierra has far more problems than usual, supporting your statement. Most of your issues (broken apps, Virtualbox), are just Sierra issues in general, not specific to older Macs (so I wouldn't put them in that pile). It's a new OS so everyone's experience will vary.
If you have read this thread from the beginning, as I believe you have, then you will already know that a lot of people have in fact posted their successes here, myself included. We have done this because we want to express our gratitude to both you and dosdude1, and to let you know that your method worked well . . . even if problems were discovered later post-installation.
I hope you understand that my comments are not meant to criticize your or dosdude1's methods. Personally, I don't begin to understand them nearly enough to even begin to be able to make a valid comment in that area. Neither are my comments meant to dis you or dosdude1.
Personally, I don't consider 126 pages full of challenges, problems and failures to be bias. It is the reality of the situation. I am surprised that you would even paint my comments as bias. They would be bias if I was the only one reporting such problems. However, as we both know, I am far from being alone regarding these matters.
I am simply honestly reporting my personal experiences -- exactly as you have done -- and asking people to judge whether or not they really want to install Sierra on their old machines, and warning them of potential pitfalls and problems. I see nothing wrong with doing this.
Breaking the iSight camera is not just a general problem. It is a serious problem. Borking my system so that I could not even log in is not a general problem. It is a serious problem. Messing up Mail's mailboxes and losing some mail is not a general problem. It can be a very serious problem for people who run businesses and such on their machines. These kinds of issues need to be highlighted so that others are made aware of the potential risk, and not relegated to a pool of "general issues", in my view.
Hmmm . . . Now you seem to be contradicting your previous statement where you said:
Again, 126 pages of comments seems to negate your perspective. You are indirectly stating that anyone who has problems must have done something improperly. That simply is not true in every case.
On that point, we can agree, and that is what I have been saying all along.
I have clearly stated my point of view, for what it is worth. I have no more to say. Let the buyer beware.
If you have read this thread from the beginning, as I believe you have, then you will already know that a lot of people have in fact posted their successes here, myself included. We have done this because we want to express our gratitude to both you and dosdude1, and to let you know that your method worked well . . . even if problems were discovered later post-installation.
I hope you understand that my comments are not meant to criticize your or dosdude1's methods. Personally, I don't begin to understand them nearly enough to even begin to be able to make a valid comment in that area. Neither are my comments meant to dis you or dosdude1.
Personally, I don't consider 126 pages full of challenges, problems and failures to be bias. It is the reality of the situation. I am surprised that you would even paint my comments as bias. They would be bias if I was the only one reporting such problems. However, as we both know, I am far from being alone regarding these matters.
I am simply honestly reporting my personal experiences -- exactly as you have done -- and asking people to judge whether or not they really want to install Sierra on their old machines, and warning them of potential pitfalls and problems. I see nothing wrong with doing this.
Breaking the iSight camera is not just a general problem. It is a serious problem. Borking my system so that I could not even log in is not a general problem. It is a serious problem. Messing up Mail's mailboxes and losing some mail is not a general problem. It can be a very serious problem for people who run businesses and such on their machines. These kinds of issues need to be highlighted so that others are made aware of the potential risk, and not relegated to a pool of "general issues", in my view.
Hmmm . . . Now you seem to be contradicting your previous statement where you said:
Again, 126 pages of comments seems to negate your perspective. You are indirectly stating that anyone who has problems must have done something improperly. That simply is not true in every case.
On that point, we can agree, and that is what I have been saying all along.
I have clearly stated my point of view, for what it is worth. I have no more to say. Let the buyer beware.
I said far more, didn't say there were none at all.
What I'm trying to get to is that you make it seem as if the cause of the broken camera is due to Sierra and an incompatible Mac alone, which is not true. The problem is caused directly by Virtualbox, and you should note that instead of skipping over it. Mail bugs, and other issues would be better highlighted in a thread of Sierra's own issues if you're trying to warn users, not just those for unsupported Macs.
Foxlet, I have not skipped over it by any means. In several of my comments here, as well as in a post I made in the compatible apps thread, as little as I understand the technical nature of the problem, I have nevertheless very specifically stated that the problem seems to concern some of VirtualBox's kexts. While I have highlighted the problem, so that others are made aware of it, it has been lost amongst all of the other issues which have been discussed in this thread.
I think this really comes down to a matter of perspective. VirtualBox works fine under El Capitan. So do we say that the problem is caused by VirtualBox under Sierra, or that the problem is caused by Sierra not liking some of VirtualBox's kexts? Of course, Apple makes the rules, so they would obviously say that it's VirtualBox's fault.
But this is just semantics. The main point is, for whatever the reasons, Sierra has not been a rosy ride for everyone, and potential users of Sierra need to be made aware of this point.
Foxlet, I work on an unsupported Mac. As such, it seems appropriate to me that I discuss the issue here, being as this thread is dedicated to folks who install Sierra on unsupported Macs. Furthermore, I have no idea whether or not folks on supported Macs have experienced this corrupted mailboxes issue under Sierra.
Hi guys,
I'm wondering if anyone could direct me to a Sierra solution for a 2008 Mac Pro (if there is one):
Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro2,1
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Processor Speed: 2.66 GHz
Number of Processors: 2
Total Number of Cores: 8
L2 Cache (per Processor): 8 MB
Memory: 20 GB
Chipset Model: ATI Radeon HD 5770
Currently running Yosemite 10.10.5
Thanks!
I'm wondering if anyone could direct me to a Sierra solution for a 2008 Mac Pro (if there is one):
Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro2,1
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Processor Speed: 2.66 GHz
Number of Processors: 2
Total Number of Cores: 8
L2 Cache (per Processor): 8 MB
Memory: 20 GB
Chipset Model: ATI Radeon HD 5770
Currently running Yosemite 10.10.5
Thanks!
That's not a 2008 Mac Pro... That's a 2007 Mac Pro 2,1, which you can't run Sierra on due to unsupported CPUs.
You both make some very valid points!Foxlet, I have not skipped over it by any means. In several of my comments here, as well as in a post I made in the compatible apps thread, as little as I understand the technical nature of the problem, I have nevertheless very specifically stated that the problem seems to concern some of VirtualBox's kexts. While I have highlighted the problem, so that others are made aware of it, it has been lost amongst all of the other issues which have been discussed in this thread.
I think this really comes down to a matter of perspective. VirtualBox works fine under El Capitan. So do we say that the problem is caused by VirtualBox under Sierra, or that the problem is caused by Sierra not liking some of VirtualBox's kexts? Of course, Apple makes the rules, so they would obviously say that it's VirtualBox's fault.
But this is just semantics. The main point is, for whatever the reasons, Sierra has not been a rosy ride for everyone, and potential users of Sierra need to be made aware of this point.
Foxlet, I work on an unsupported Mac. As such, it seems appropriate to me that I discuss the issue here, being as this thread is dedicated to folks who install Sierra on unsupported Macs. Furthermore, I have no idea whether or not folks on supported Macs have experienced this corrupted mailboxes issue under Sierra.
If I may chime in on the whole VirtualBox issue...
A few posts back, I decided to dive in and test the iSight issue myself. I'm a glutton for punishment. So much so that my iSight is now borked too!
It manifests itself in a similar way:- iSight works
- install vbox (latest 5.1.6) +Windows 10
- FaceTime+PhotoBooth can't find the camera
- stop the vm
- once case where PhotoBooth (after a long delay) got Video
- restart Sierra
- iSight unavailable. Facetime+PhotoBooth inoperable
- start and stop vm
- iSight still unavailable. Facetime+PhotoBooth inoperable
- shutdown - SMC and PRAM reset - kext rebuild etc...
- iSight still unavailable. Facetime+PhotoBooth inoperable
So it's become a side project to figure this out coz I'm sure there must be a solution.
Here's the thing. I was about to file an Oracle bug report when it occured to me that I actually don't know whether this is a Sierra proper OR a Sierra+unsupported-mac(patched) issue. Does anyone? Has anyone here actually installed vbox 5.1.6 (let's say with win10) on a supported Sierra mac? I think this would help greatly in the bug hunt.
It's all good.
Last edited:
dosdude1,
Thanks for the reply. Which CPU's will work? I'm wondering if I could upgrade as the current configuration is upgraded...
Thanks!!
There are none, that machine doesn't support any CPUs that support SSE4.1, so you can't run Sierra on it whatsoever.
Did you by any chance look at the thread that foxlet mentioned? I did, and it begins to get particularly interesting at the bottom of page two of the comments with a user who installed Sierra:
https://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=75844
No solutions offered there yet though.
PS: Well, what I should say is that the whole thread is interesting, but it is at that point that Sierra is specifically mentioned for the first time. However, as Foxlet correctly noted, losing control of the mouse and keyboard is apparently not just limited to Sierra . . . and there is no specific mention of the iSight camera. I wonder if the folks in that thread are just not aware of it.
Hi guys!
I'm looking for a more elegant way to skip machine chek in Sierra (without editing dist files or without using any 3rd party url). Anyone knows about "/var/db/softwareupdated/productvalidations.plist"? I we found a way to skip some checks for updates (maybe). When i check SoftwareUpdate PrivateFramework with 'otool -tvV', i found some intresting things:
- method with name "loadProductValidations", that loads productvalidations.plist (if file exists) with dictionaryWithContentsOfFile
- method with name "validationOverrideForProductKey" that checks a dict about the following keys:
- pass-all-checks (boolValue)
- installation-check (string, checked for "pass")
- volume-check (string, checked for "pass")
- visible (boolValue)
- visibleOnlyForPredicate (boolValue)
But i can't figure out the right syntax for "/var/db/softwareupdated/productvalidations.plist". Anyone can help me how to debug the running softwareupdated with SoftwareUpdate privateframework?
I'm looking for a more elegant way to skip machine chek in Sierra (without editing dist files or without using any 3rd party url). Anyone knows about "/var/db/softwareupdated/productvalidations.plist"? I we found a way to skip some checks for updates (maybe). When i check SoftwareUpdate PrivateFramework with 'otool -tvV', i found some intresting things:
- method with name "loadProductValidations", that loads productvalidations.plist (if file exists) with dictionaryWithContentsOfFile
- method with name "validationOverrideForProductKey" that checks a dict about the following keys:
- pass-all-checks (boolValue)
- installation-check (string, checked for "pass")
- volume-check (string, checked for "pass")
- visible (boolValue)
- visibleOnlyForPredicate (boolValue)
But i can't figure out the right syntax for "/var/db/softwareupdated/productvalidations.plist". Anyone can help me how to debug the running softwareupdated with SoftwareUpdate privateframework?
Yes, it also never really occured to me to check. And Yes this is a typical vbox thread. I agree with @foxlet, if you've played with VMs like vbox/parallels/vmware as long as I have you know this kinda problem is extremely frequent. The whole "capture and release" of host devices is fairly complex to manage correctly. That said, it would still be nice to find more substantial proof that vbox just breaks in Sierra proper. Meanwhile, checking the kext situation locally before and after vbox. Need to revive my iSight on the mbp 5,3....
No, validation checks is determinated by DistributionKit.framework (this frameworks embed the JavaScriptCore.framework and calls sysctls with sysctlbyname method, i can override that checks and make fool SoftwareUpdate to beleive it's a virtulized system, but it's require to modify /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.softwareupdated.plist, and i don't want to repatch it again and again, and i want a system with absolute minimal mods and a functioning rootless). DistributionKit being called from PackageKit and SoftwareUpdate.framework.
Softwareupdate.framework is embedded in the softwareupdated, and softwareupdated is called when user check updates via AppStore.app and/or with /usr/sbin/softwareupdate.
If you look into SoftwareUpdate.Framework (/System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/SoftwareUpdate.framework/SoftwareUpdate) with otool, you can see 'loadProductValidations' and 'validationOverrideForProductKey'. So i'm need to figure out what is the correct syntax for that plist, and boom, it's working.
Edit:
Firstly i built a kext to patch machdep.cpu.features. It's worked, and i can add VMM to it, but when the kext loaded, every app thinks about its a virtualzed OS. The main problem is in xnu, because many and many timing related stuff goes confused when see VMM on a non virtualized OS. So if i can't limit VMM to SU only, it's not a good mod.
Last edited:
I just posted a message in that VirtualBox thread, so that they are aware of the fact that we are discussing it here as well.
Yes, I noticed that there are a number of other threads there which likewise discuss Sierra/VB issues, but I didn't take the time to read them, being as I no longer have either Sierra or VB installed.