Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

macOS Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Discussion

Status
The first post of this thread is a WikiPost and can be edited by anyone with the appropiate permissions. Your edits will be public.
hackintosh_user said:
How can I get Opencore legacy patcher's auto patcher ( patcher that works during the final part of installation) on ivy bridge 2012 MacBook pro? Because ever since it started needing the MetallibsupportPkg, the auto patcher never works. I have tried putting the PKG where the autopkgassets.pkg but it doesn't patch. How can I get it to patch?
Click to expand...

Well, you can't patch Ivy Bridge since it uses Intel HD 4000 and there's no MetallibsupportPkg avaialable for it.

For general instruction on how to prepare and enable AutoPatching, you can read this: https://github.com/5T33Z0/OCLP4Hackintosh/blob/main/Guides/Auto-Patching.md
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
5T33Z0 said:
Well, you can't patch Ivy Bridge since it uses Intel HD 4000 and there's no MetallibsupportPkg avaialable for it.

For general instruction on how to prepare and enable AutoPatching, you can read this: https://github.com/5T33Z0/OCLP4Hackintosh/blob/main/Guides/Auto-Patching.md
Click to expand...
I used this guide (btw thanks for the guide!) but it doesn't mention what to do if your system has a metal 3802 GPU (nVidia kelper, Intel IVY bridge (Hd4000), and Intel haswell (HD4600) ). I do remember it once patched Sequoia because I was testing out a beta version and my other install had the Metallib and it patched it during the install.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
Apple has posted Tahoe 26.6 Beta 2.

Some may consider this Spoiler to be Off-Topic. I'm posting this figure to show the version # of Tahoe 26.6 Beta 2.
Do not click this Spoiler if you are inclined to suspect acts of desperation, you are easily offended by trivialities or you insist on rigorously defending the purity of this thread.
Screenshot 2026-06-15 at 6.27.55 PM.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: olad, sinbad21, tchek and 5 others
If we do eventually get macOS Tahoe to boot on the unsupported MacMini8,1 (which means that someone solved the T2 problem), I've noticed something interesting about macOS Tahoe Beta updates. At some point during the Tahoe release schedule, Apple appears to have started a different screening process for enrolling Macs in Tahoe Beta updates.

Earlier in the Tahoe release schedule, my unsupported MacMini8,1 hacks with new installations of macOS Tahoe had unrestricted access to incremental macOS Tahoe beta updates. Lately (not sure of the exact Tahoe version), MacMini8,1 hacks with new installations of Tahoe are no longer able to enroll in Apple's Tahoe beta updates program.

My fix for this is here.

EDIT: Note that I have a hack with supported SMBIOS MBP16,2 and it has no problem with Tahoe beta updates.
Screenshot 2026-06-15 at 8.29.32 PM.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
hackintosh_user said:
I used this guide (btw thanks for the guide!) but it doesn't mention what to do if your system has a metal 3802 GPU (nVidia kelper, Intel IVY bridge (Hd4000), and Intel haswell (HD4600) ). I do remember it once patched Sequoia because I was testing out a beta version and my other install had the Metallib and it patched it during the install.
Click to expand...

Unless a MetallibSupport.pkg is avaialble for Tahoe, you won't have graphics acceleration. I've added a note to the guide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734 and john905r
codisbim said:
why cant the devs at oclp post how much they have right now so then others around the community can build off of it
Click to expand...
Because unfortunately people would harass them to ask about how much till it's supported or some outright ask for the devs to hand them the code. So they kept it quiet and it's better for them so they can work in peace and quiet and not get sent messages of people begging for the code.
 
  • Like
Reactions: olad, BradleyinDC, TimothyR734 and 1 other person
hackintosh_user said:
Because unfortunately people would harass them to ask about how much till it's supported or some outright ask for the devs to hand them the code. So they kept it quiet and it's better for them so they can work in peace and quiet and not get sent messages of people begging for the code.
Click to expand...
They have just to publish current code in a beta thread and people will do what they want, at their own risks. Simple. No need to answer to any question, or even read them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hackintosh_user, TimothyR734 and Heindijs
hackintosh_user said:
Because unfortunately people would harass them to ask about how much till it's supported or some outright ask for the devs to hand them the code. So they kept it quiet and it's better for them so they can work in peace and quiet and not get sent messages of people begging for the code.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I think progress would be much quicker if they'd publish anything they develop (with proper documentation) immediately to the Github repo instead of keeping it private. It's hardly an 'open source' project if they work in private.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hackintosh_user, sealsealy, TimothyR734 and 2 others
Heindijs said:
To be honest, I think progress would be much quicker if they'd publish anything they develop (with proper documentation) immediately to the Github repo instead of keeping it private. It's hardly an 'open source' project if they work in private.
Click to expand...
sinbad21 said:
They have just to publish current code in a beta thread and people will do what they want, at their own risks. Simple. No need to answer to any question, or even read them.
Click to expand...
I See both of your Points But Publishing the Current Code, and have people flood the Github to download it, install it then only find out that Parts of it break when their system updates to the next update, then start asking on the discord, Reddit, And Here Will Disrupt the Developers Work and quiet. Last Release With 2.0.0 they did it and people if I recall Correctly Flood the discord and Reddit with Requests for Help because their system broke. gee I wonder why?. But Hopefully We Just get a release soon! Give them Time!
 
  • Like
Reactions: olad, tchek, macinfo and 1 other person
basslik said:
Quick side question.

“I remember back in the day that OCLP could boot into old macOS versions like Mountain Lion when the RX 580 was the go-to card.”

?
Click to expand...

RX 580 started to be supported with 10.12.6. With EnableGop support, you can load previous macOS releases and have a completely un-accelerated display, maybe useful for anything non graphical or diagnostics.

Btw, why post this here?!?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
I am writing about the latest messages on the Tahoe, thank you to the developers about the messages about working on 26 MacOS, I wish you the easiest ways for the system patches and that there are no critical bugs when it started, I actively follow the topic of Tahoe and people's opinions about Tahoe are somewhat different, some hate Tahoe and say not to do it because no one wants it, some (such as me) want to see tahoe and are interested in when there will be support, and there are those who do not care, but there are still those who distinguish not support for Tahoe, the fault of the developers that "they do not want to do this while closing the collection of donations but still They get thousands of dollars somehow and say just wait" I heard this on the channel of a Russian blogger who shoots about macs and talked about this topic, I think here it is not necessary to explain that these are just words taken from unknown where, so I wish the developers not to listen to such intellectual peoples and more more spirit of working on this Tahoe and the most holes in Tahoe itself for starting patches, so it probably doesn't sound as right as it should because I'm not a developer but if this message is read by the developers I wish you all the best and know that we believe in you! Thank you for your cool work on all the macos remaining Tahoe final :apple: We believe in you!
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Pri-est and hackintosh_user
codisbim said:
why cant the devs at oclp post how much they have right now so then others around the community can build off of it
Click to expand...
People would inevitably try to use the not-complete output and then complain about things that are not working. OCLP devs aren't prepared to offer any support or deal with that kind of message influx, nor should anyone expect them to be. It's better for them to just wait until it is done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: olad, TimothyR734 and houser
hackintosh_user said:
is it me or Am I the only one who doesn't know the remaining Developers for OpenCore legacy patcher? I used to know the main 3 khronoKernel, Dhinak and educovas but they left and I honestly don't know the remaining team.
Click to expand...

Just look at the contributor stats and you know it: https://github.com/dortania/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/graphs/contributors?all=1

This also speaks volumes: https://github.com/dortania/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/graphs/code-frequency

So far for "OCLP is not dead!"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hackintosh_user and TimothyR734
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back