Jump to content

[pre-release] macOS Sonoma

fantomas

By fantomas,
in New Releases and Updates

 Share
1,844 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

This is kinda off-topic, kinda.

Guy, i've been thinking about the nightly builds link that I've been sharing and the questions @cankiulascmnfye and @deeveedee been asking about the advantages of those builds got me thinking wether I should keep doing it or not since the devs advised not to share them on the forums.

So I guess I should take them down.

I don't want to disregard the developers request or disrespect them by sharing the files.

If any one needs help with the builds just let me know back in my forum I don't want to make mess here.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
deeveedee
deeveedee
Posted
Posted

@Cyberdevs I think that's best, although I'm already on the OCLP Dev $#!T list for asking about BCM 94352HMB patching on Discord, so I'm more paranoid about offending the Devs than others.  I don't blame them at all for wanting to retain full control of all build distributions and I also don't blame them for limiting their support to real Macs - that's hard enough.

 

Sonoma 23A5301h upgrade proceeded without any issues on my HackBookPro6,2 patched with Official Dortania 0.6.9 Sonoma nightly build (07.28.23). I am still spoofing Wi-Fi to be able to use the unmodified Dortania OCLP patcher.   I left it unattended, so I don't know how long it took to upgrade or how many reboots.  After the macOS upgrade, OCLP automatically prompted to install NVidia Tesla and Wi-Fi patches.  I still don't have full NVidia Tesla non-metal acceleration, but that is expected.

 

About This Hack: Sonoma 23A5301h

Spoiler

1999828741_Screenshot2023-08-02at3_42_52PM.png.d1cae19910a73f828996ff1f7cb1bfd6.png

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
eSaF
eSaF
Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Cyberdevs said:

I don't want to disregard the developers request or disrespect them by sharing the files.

I agree, as the Devs stipulated not to share the files on other sites. I built a couple myself but found it more convenient to get them from your builds but I fully understand your decision to abide by the Dev's request.

It is also a big plus that you offered help to anyone who needs it going forward. You are not obligated to fulfill that task which I find very commendable but I was told by quite a few members by P/M you're that kind of guy so big respect. :thumbsup_anim:

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted

@deeveedee I totally understand their point of view on controlling the distribution of OCLP's preview or beta builds. That's why I came to that conclusion.

@eSaF Thanks for you kind response I really appreciate it.

 

The main reason that I've decided to make the OCLP nightly builds available on my forum was simply because that the link they provided in their source.md wasn't always working when I tested them and the latest builds that I've made from the source seemed to be more updated so that got me thinking to share the latest. But as I said if that's what they ask I should respect that, even though no one has complained about it yet but still it didn't feel right to go forward.

Anyways I'll be more than glad to help the members of the community here or anywhere else so I'm available if anyone needed my help.

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skyfallkavu
Skyfallkavu
Posted
Posted (edited)

Well, they say just don’t link the nightlies themselves because they may be broken or outdated. Validated nightlies are available here: https://github.com/dortania/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/pull/1077

 

It says they prefer you link to this post instead of the builds, but this post has a buildbot link for the latest validated nightlies, which has WiFi patch support. Just come back to this post whenever you need to download a new copy. I get it from here whenever I update macOS.

 

Edit: Sorry, I didn’t read properly where you addressed that. Validated nightlies here should be safe to use, but being validated, they need to be tested and confirmed. It won’t be source latest, but these work fine.

Edited by Skyfallkavu
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Max.1974
Max.1974
Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, miliuco said:

Sonoma beta 3 + OpenCore 0.9.4 + iMacPro1,1 + Fenvi wireless by OCLP >> no update (system is up to date). I think this is as expected.


Updating to Sonoma beta 4:

  1. sbvmm boot arg + Restrict Events >> incremental update but with full package
  2. sbvmm boot arg + Restrict Events + reverting OCLP root patch >> incremental update but with full package
  3. sbvmm boot arg + Restrict Events + removing OCLP changes (csr-active-config=00000000, SecureBootModel not Disabled, amfi=0x80 not in boot args and disabling the related kexts) >> incremental update ok
  4. changing SMBIOS to iMac19,1 >> incremental update ok.

After upgrading via mode 3, I root patched again and everything seems to work fine. Beta 4 runs slightly smoother than beta 3. Desktop appears less jerky and, in general, everything appears smoother.

 

Just for information, about OTA update, im disable BlueToolFixup (with min Kernel 23.0.0 for Ventura) and works with iMacPro 1,1 SMBIOS. If temporarily disable for Sonoma, not need sbvm boot args. Just for update ;)

Remove AirportBrcmFixup.kext for both. 

 

 

Captura de Tela 2023-08-02 às 21.44.08.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry2010
Henry2010
Posted
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, D3v1L said:

iCloud signed or not, is not relevant at all. You use a T2 chip based smbios. For receive incremental ota update, you need to use RestrictEvents.kext with sbvmm boot-args otherwise, you don't give nothing. (or switch to imac19,1 smbios)

 

Thanks a lot, I received the OTA update. If it happened again (SIP is disabled now to kill the pop-ups) I will switch the SMBIOS.


 

Spoiler

A tip to others: do NOT use nightly kext builds on https://dortania.github.io/builds/, except NVMeFix.

At least on my Hack here, it will only enter a restart loop.

 

EDIT

Not a tip. But an observation.

I also tried the nightly kext builds, only because I couldn't get the OTA and the system froze once.

But it didn't help and the hack build entered a restart loop.

 

Edited by Henry2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cankiulascmnfye
cankiulascmnfye
Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Henry2010 said:

A tip to others: do NOT use nightly kext builds on https://dortania.github.io/builds/, except NVMeFix

At least on my Hack here, it will only enter a restart loop.

 

 

 

I have been using these Nightly Builds for 2 or 3 years now. In some rare cases the devs change too much and a kext can cause a Panic. This happened to me once in all this time. I reported it and then the changes were reverted. So using these builds can actually help development. If you want to test the initial release of the newest OS, you need those kexts. If you are a regular user who doesn't run public betas of macOS, your don't need them.  Your tip is misplaced in a thread that's all about using the latest builds of a work-in-progress beta OS. People who use nightly builds should know why they are using them and how to analyze errors once they occur. If you can't do that, you shouldn't use them. And you probably also shouldn't install Public or Developments Betas of macOS as well in this case.

Edited by cankiulascmnfye
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry2010
Henry2010
Posted
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, cankiulascmnfye said:

 

I have been using these Nightly Builds for 2 or 3 years now. In some rare cases the devs change too much and a kext can cause a Panic. This happened to me once in all this time. I reported it and then the changes were reverted. So using these builds can actually help development. If you want to test the initial release of the newest OS, you need those kexts. If you are a regular user who doesn't run public betas of macOS, your don't need them.  Your tip is misplaced in a thread that's all about using the latest builds of a work-in-progress beta OS. People who use nightly builds should know why they are using them and how to analyze errors once they occur. If you can't do that, you shouldn't use them. And you probably also shouldn't install Public or Developments Betas of macOS as well in this case.

 

So instead of coming to a Hackintosh community, I should just shut up and quit a PUBLIC Beta when I have a problem because I am not as clever as you.

Do I have to tell you why I installed Sonoma in the first place to get your permission?

It was wrong to use the word "tip", I get it. I am going to buy an English dictionary now.

Edited by Henry2010
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cankiulascmnfye
cankiulascmnfye
Posted
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Henry2010 said:

 

So instead of coming to a Hackintosh community, I should just shut up and quit a PUBLIC Beta when I have a problem because I am not as clever as you.

Do I have to tell you why I installed Sonoma in the first place to get your permission?

It was wrong to use the word "tip", I get it. I am going to buy an English dictionary now.

 

No, but just because you witnessed an error you should not turn your one-time experience into a general DO NOT USE recommendation! It's unjustified! Just don't make it personal.

Edited by cankiulascmnfye
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry2010
Henry2010
Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, cankiulascmnfye said:

 

No, but just because you witnessed an error you should not turn your one-time experience into a general DO NOT USE recommendation! It's unjustified! Just don't make it personal.

That I agree. Posts are now folded.

Edited by Henry2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites
miliuco
miliuco
Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Cyberdevs said:

I guess the SMBIOS part is what's different from your experience and mine, I didn't change my config, just reverted the root patches on iMac19,1 SMBIOS and I got the incremental updates.

Maybe due to different systems. You see that if I change to iMac19,1 I also have incremental update, like you.
I'm complaint with this situation because they are small drawbacks compared to having the Fenvi wifi back up and running with Airdrop and the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted
Just now, miliuco said:

Maybe due to different systems. You see that if I change to iMac19,1 I also have incremental update, like you.
I'm complaint with this situation because they are small drawbacks compared to having the Fenvi wifi back up and running with Airdrop and the rest.

I did several tests on my KabyLake rig today and the only thing that I had to add to the config to get the incremental updates on MacPro SMBIOS was the revpatch=sbvmm 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
miliuco
miliuco
Posted
Posted
Just now, Cyberdevs said:

I did several tests on my KabyLake rig today and the only thing that I had to add to the config to get the incremental updates on MacPro SMBIOS was the revpatch=sbvmm 

I'll try carefully next beta, on this beta 4 I needed also reverting OCLP changes in config.plist to get the incremental package, revpatch=sbvmm gave to me the full package.

Anyway, it's ok, a few days ago I did not know when I would have (or even if I would have) Wi-Fi with the Fenvi so... 🙂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, miliuco said:

I'll try carefully next beta, on this beta 4 I needed also reverting OCLP changes in config.plist to get the incremental package, revpatch=sbvmm gave to me the full package.

Anyway, it's ok, a few days ago I did not know when I would have (or even if I would have) Wi-Fi with the Fenvi so... 🙂

Yes reverting the OCLP patches is necessary to get the incremental updates on all SMBIOS configurations but as far as I've tested there's no need to revert the setting in the config. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
miliuco
miliuco
Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Cyberdevs said:

Yes reverting the OCLP patches is necessary to get the incremental updates on all SMBIOS configurations but as far as I've tested there's no need to revert the setting in the config. 

Ok, understood, let me try in the next beta.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skyfallkavu
Skyfallkavu
Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Cyberdevs said:

@miliuco

Yes that concludes my testings. only revpatch=sbvmm was required on MacPro7,1 SMBIOS. I assume the same applies to iMacPro1,1 as well.

Will test on iMacPro1,1. Just added restrictevents and revpatch=sbvmm. I won't be reverting OCLP patches, but I wouldn't mind if it gives me full package. Previously software update has just been giving me failed to download on all of Sonoma. I've been updating through running the .pkg for each. Now to wait for b5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberdevs
Cyberdevs
Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Skyfallkavu said:

Will test on iMacPro1,1. Just added restrictevents and revpatch=sbvmm. I won't be reverting OCLP patches, but I wouldn't mind if it gives me full package. Previously software update has just been giving me failed to download on all of Sonoma. I've been updating through running the .pkg for each. Now to wait for b5.

There are few reasons for an update to fail and one of the is the BluetoolFixup.kext being enabled during the update and another one is to booting from another EFI folder that isn't being used for the OS to boot from normally which loads a different APFS snapshot which results to fail while trying to install the update.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...