Security Update 2005-007 v1.1 Released

[Arnaud]

Now I restarted my computer and I logged back in to the blue default screen and all of my music and pictures are missing, yet my movies are still there. My HD says that the space that my mp3's (40+ GB) exsisted in, is still taken up, so I don't think they are lost. I can deal with all my programs being defualt, but not losing data. Can anyone help me out with this? I'm really stressing because I didn't back up anything. All my apps, documents, and movies are still there but mp3's and pictures are not. I don't know even the first thing to do.

I'll ask the obvious, but did you search on your HD for the files out of their folder ? If you still have the same amout of space on the HD, it's possible a root reference got damaged, and your files are not referenced to the same spot/folder anymore - ie, the HD would show them in another directory, maybe on the first level.

Spotlight could be a start, although his indexing might be flawed too. Otherwise, track down the folder by size, trying to figure out which folder is amazingly too big (like, 40 Gb too big ).

It happened to me in the past, and recently with Panther. (The cause though is still unsure, it's a mix of damaged HD and wrong results of a disk utility software). Needless to say, I found my stuff, backed up everything and re-formatted the HD...

A.

 

[shawnce]

Note that the 32-bit Pentium 4 can do 64-bit and 128-bit integer arithmetic in hardware using SSE2/SSE3 instructions.

Yup.. I was only talking about Mac OS X on G5s (PPC 970, etc.) and the fact that 32/64 bit virtual addressing doesn't affect the ability to use 64 bit integer/general math instructions supported by the G5 (at least in application).

 

[crees!]

For those of you who don't have a G5 and are complaining. Stop. It (64-bit) doesn't affect you.

 

[dontmatter]

hmm, this is weird. Installed, kept going on with life. Then (related, or not, I'm trying to figure out) I'm getting this message saying airport wants access to my keychain, b/c there's a new version, would I like to update all of the keychain, etc. etc. Help tells me that I might be getting this message due to a virus. This sucks.

Anybody else getting weird stuff with airport, or do I have a virus, or is this just my mac thinking it's running windows?

 

[mkrishnan]

hmm, this is weird. Installed, kept going on with life. Then (related, or not, I'm trying to figure out) I'm getting this message saying airport wants access to my keychain, b/c there's a new version, would I like to update all of the keychain, etc. etc. Help tells me that I might be getting this message due to a virus. This sucks.

Anybody else getting weird stuff with airport, or do I have a virus, or is this just my mac thinking it's running windows?

Did this happen right at reboot, or at least the first time you tried to acquire an Airport connection? It's not a virus -- that's what it's supposed to do. As discussed previously, even though only the LibSystem thing changed with 1.1 vs. 1.0, the updater overwrites all the files. Airport is doing what it's supposed to do when the software changes -- making sure you still consider it okay for it to access data from the keychain. It's a feature that's there to protect you. Nothing much at all like "it's running windows."

 

[ericdano]

Crashes my M-Audio soundcard

This update totally breaks my M-Audio 2496 soundcard. Loading any program that attempts to use it results in an immediate system freeze.

The card worked fine in 10.4.2 BEFORE this update.

 

[autrefois]

When did iTunes start selling MP3's ???

Please stop being deliberatively argumentative. I know very well that iTunes sells AACs. However the person asking for help didn't know what permissions were and was probably not a native English speaker. Certainly you don't assume that someone who doesn't know how to repair permissions will know the difference between mp3s and AACs.

Somebody lost all their music and photos, and the response you had was to tell them to rip all their CDs again, a very time-consuming process, while not even addressing the issue about all his lost photos. Do you honestly think this was the best advice?

Or were you just trying to make a point that people should not have illegal mp3s? As someone who has a 100% legal music collection, I know there are in fact many ways to legally get mp3s without purchasing a CD (I just purchased four protection-free mp3s from an indy artist, for example). Or were you just trying to promote the virtues of the AAC format?

My post was trying to help someone who was having a problem by quickly sending him to the proper place in the forums where he might get some real help. What was the point of your post?

Now can we get back on topic?

 

[florencevassy]

Did this happen right at reboot, or at least the first time you tried to acquire an Airport connection? It's not a virus -- that's what it's supposed to do. As discussed previously, even though only the LibSystem thing changed with 1.1 vs. 1.0, the updater overwrites all the files. Airport is doing what it's supposed to do when the software changes -- making sure you still consider it okay for it to access data from the keychain. It's a feature that's there to protect you. Nothing much at all like "it's running windows."

Thanks mkrishnan. The same thing happened to me, I told them to overwrite the files. When I rebooted the second time I did not get that message.

 

[Shaun.P]

Why do I not see the update in software update? Is it only for 64 bit computers?

I have an eMac.

 

[mkrishnan]

Why do I not see the update in software update? Is it only for 64 bit computers?

I have an eMac.

No, any Mac running 10.4.2 and the 1.0 version of this security update. Are you sure you didn't install the security update late enough the first time that you already have the v1.1 version? To find out, go to system preferences -> software update -> installed updates and look at the version number for the security update.

 

[Shaun.P]

You're right! Thanks for your help .

 

[mkrishnan]

You're right! Thanks for your help .

Sweet... That's what I wish I had done, instead of downloading it early and then now having to reboot again. :rolleyes

 

[ASP272]

I believe this security update has caused a major problem for me. I have a 450mhz G4 (AGP) with a DVD-RAM drive and now my drive will not read burnt DVD-Rs. I have a lot of stuff backed up on DVD-R and they worked just fine before this update. Now when I insert a burned DVD-R it just spins a minute and spits it back out. Any ideas anyone? I've tried repairing permissions, restarting in OS 9 even, but no luck. It's like this update broke my DVD-RAM drive software that reads burnt discs. All other retail DVDs, data or movies, read just fine. HELP!

 

[Bubbasteve]

Ever since the new security update I can't video chat with people. Not only that but my icon indicates I can only host a single person video chat.

 

[AidenShaw]

try MacFixit or other troubleshooting sites

I believe this security update has caused a major problem for me.
....
HELP!

Try MacFixit.com and its forums for problem help...

They have threads on the security update problems with 2005-7.

http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20050817004449736

 

[Apple Corps]

Security Update Saga ??????

I posted earlier that the initial update was a huge problem on my Rev B. dual 1.8 G5. After loading the update my Mac would not wake from sleep - and ALL hard restarts resulted in two (2) flat blue screens with nothing but the cursor showing on them. Screen brightness, dvd drawer and sound adjustments were all that would work. So - reload the system and get all of my files recovered from the "Previous1" system folder - hours wasted - I WILL NOT be so fast to "update" again.

Out of interest - I have no security update showing in syspref AND NONE available for my Mac through Software Update - does anyone know WHY the 1.1 is not available for my Mac?

Thanks

 

[mkrishnan]

Out of interest - I have no security update showing in syspref AND NONE available for my Mac through Software Update - does anyone know WHY the 1.1 is not available for my Mac?

Tiger or Panther?

 

[ASP272]

Try MacFixit.com and its forums for problem help...

They have threads on the security update problems with 2005-7.

http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20050817004449736

Thanks! I'll take a look there.

 

[Apple Corps]

Tiger

 

[mkrishnan]

Tiger

Dunno, then. But you can download it:

Link to 2005007 v1.1 download

 

[Apple Corps]

Thanks - but after my last experience........

It appears that perhaps there is something at play with my dual 1.8 that causes big issues - thus the update is not available ???????

 

[zahuhzahuh]

shockwave and other apps aren't working

Is anyone else having a problem with shockwave and windows media player? Here is the error, if anyone knows how to fix it please reply. Thanks.

The page “MacNN | Apple, iPod, Mac news @ The Macintosh News Network” attempted to load an Internet plug-in named “Shockwave Flash”, but the plug-in failed to load successfully.

The error I get my opening windows media player is this:

The application "Windows Media Player" could not be launched because of a shared library error: "7<WindowsMediaPlayer><CarbonLib><CFMPriv_LangAnalysis><>"

Please help! Thanks! My email is heysaiedison@gmail.com

 

[shamino]

Also note that virtually every Mac or PC sold in the last 10-15 years can do 64-bit double precision floating point in the hardware (or FPU). This includes the 68K, 80x86, Pentium, 60x, G3, G4,....

Just about ever floating point chip ever made supports 64-bit floats. Even the 8087 coprocessor (optional add-on for most 8088-based PC's back in the 80's). Something about it being an IEEE standard.

But that isn't really a substitute for a 64-bit integer unit. A 64-bit float has less than 64 bits of precision (because some bits are needed for the sign and exponent). And, until recently, floating point operations were much slower than integer operations.

 

[AidenShaw]

Just about ever floating point chip ever made supports 64-bit floats. Even the 8087 coprocessor (optional add-on for most 8088-based PC's back in the 80's). Something about it being an IEEE standard.

But that isn't really a substitute for a 64-bit integer unit. A 64-bit float has less than 64 bits of precision (because some bits are needed for the sign and exponent). And, until recently, floating point operations were much slower than integer operations.

Actually, the 8087 does 80-bit floating arithmetic.

My point, though, was to counter the common but incorrect belief that you need a G5 to do 64-bit arithmetic. As you also point out, 64-bit arithmetic has been ubiquitous for decades.

I wasn't suggesting using double floats instead of 64-bit integers - on the Pentium 4 you have 64-bit integer hardware in the SSE unit, and with x64 you have full 64-bit registers.

While you'll find that almost all programs use some 64-bit integers (even on 32-bit machines), very few programs use 64-bit integers to the point where it's a performance issue to run on 32-bit systems.

 

[shamino]

Actually, the 8087 does 80-bit floating arithmetic.

In addition to 32- and 64-bit, yes. It does all of its internal calculations at 80-bit, in order to minimize round-off error, truncating the results afterwards.

Apps can even use the 80-bit type directly (usually accessed as the "long double" type in C), but there's a performance hit when doing so. I think even modern Pentium-series chips still take a performance hit when working with the 80-bit floats.

My point, though, was to counter the common but incorrect belief that you need a G5 to do 64-bit arithmetic. As you also point out, 64-bit arithmetic has been ubiquitous for decades.

But you're confusing floats and integers. 64-bit integer arithmetic is very rare in 32-bit processors. (Do you know of any examples?) The operations, when provided by high-level languages, end up compiling to multiple instructions.

I wasn't suggesting using double floats instead of 64-bit integers - on the Pentium 4 you have 64-bit integer hardware in the SSE unit, and with x64 you have full 64-bit registers.

Then why discuss floats when I was talking about integers beforehand?

While you'll find that almost all programs use some 64-bit integers (even on 32-bit machines), very few programs use 64-bit integers to the point where it's a performance issue to run on 32-bit systems.

This is because programmers make a point of not using 64-bit integers in timing-critical sections of their applications.

When 64-bit processors become universal, you'll see that trend change. Once 64-bit integer math can be done in a single clock (the way 32-bit math is done today), you'll see programmers use the type all over the place. This will result in code that, if compiled for a 32-bit chip, will end up with performance penalties.

The same thing happened when the world went from 16- to 32-bits. Programmers used to be careful to not use type "long" when "short" would do, knowing that the wider type will impose a penalty. Today, it's rare to find a programmer that cares, because 32-bit types are just as fast, and are sometimes faster, than 16-bit types.