Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #118448 > unrolled thread

Mojave in a VM?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Mojave in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-09-27 11:20 -0400
    Re: Mojave in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-27 11:52 -0400
    Re: Mojave in a VM? "Andre G. Isaak" <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2018-09-27 10:00 -0600
    Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-09-28 09:18 +1200
      Re: Mojave in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-09-28 17:42 +0000
        Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-09-29 11:59 +1200
        Re: Mojave in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-09-29 10:45 -0400
          Re: Mojave in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-09-29 17:36 +0000
            Re: Mojave in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-09-29 13:37 -0400
          Re: Mojave in a VM? Percival John Hackworth <pjh@nanoworks.com> - 2018-09-29 23:56 -0700
    Re: Mojave in a VM? befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2018-09-28 09:24 +0200
    Re: Mojave in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-09-28 17:30 +0000
      Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-09-29 11:59 +1200
        Re: Mojave in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 20:06 -0400
          Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-09-29 12:43 +1200
            Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-10-01 13:15 +1300
              Re: Mojave in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-10-01 01:58 -0400
              Re: Mojave in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-10-01 13:22 +0000
                Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-10-02 02:59 +1300
                  Re: Mojave in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-10-01 10:08 -0400
                  Re: Mojave in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-10-01 13:37 -0400
                    Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-10-02 13:30 +1300
                      Re: Mojave in a VM? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2018-10-02 00:37 +0000
                      Re: Mojave in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-10-02 09:28 +0000
                  Re: Mojave in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-10-01 19:43 +0000
                    Re: Mojave in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-10-02 13:30 +1300
    Re: Mojave in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-09-28 17:02 -0400

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#118564

On 2018-10-01 09:59, David Empson wrote:

> I will not have any sympathy if someone misuses this to stick their head
> in the sand and ignore the problem.

The warnings on individual apps that come out "randomly" are not a means
to know if you should or shouldn't upgrade.

The "Applications" tab in the System Profiler will list ALL 32 bit apps
(if you sort it by the bitness column) and that would be the only
comprehensive list of apps you need to consider.

Remember that an app that is important but which you only use
irregularly may not be shown in the output from
defaults read com.apple.coreservices.uiagent


This is why I feel those random warnings are really useless. What Apple
should have done is generate a complete list of apps that are 32bits and
somehow email it to the user with a warning those will stop working and
need to be updated.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#118574

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-10-01 09:59, David Empson wrote:
> 
> > I will not have any sympathy if someone misuses this to stick their head
> > in the sand and ignore the problem.
> 
> The warnings on individual apps that come out "randomly" are not a means
> to know if you should or shouldn't upgrade.
> 
> The "Applications" tab in the System Profiler will list ALL 32 bit apps
> (if you sort it by the bitness column) and that would be the only
> comprehensive list of apps you need to consider.

System Information (it hasn't been called System Profiler since Snow
Leopard).

And there is an even easier method: Mojave adds a "Legacy Software"
category in System Information.

> Remember that an app that is important but which you only use
> irregularly may not be shown in the output from
> defaults read com.apple.coreservices.uiagent

I'm not concerned about applications I have now, but new ones I happen
to run in the next year. I'm not going to go individually checking every
new app I install, so this warning is very useful in that case because
it draws my immediate attention to the fact that the new application
won't work in future.

> This is why I feel those random warnings are really useless. What Apple
> should have done is generate a complete list of apps that are 32bits

They have, in System Information > Legacy Software.

It is even mentioned on the web page explaining the situation with
support for 32-bit applications, which you get to read if you click the
Learn More button in the alert that pops up when you run a 32-bit app
for the first time (or the first time after 30 days since the last
warning in Mojave).
-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#118576

On 2018-10-02, David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-10-01 09:59, David Empson wrote:
>> 
>> > I will not have any sympathy if someone misuses this to stick their head
>> > in the sand and ignore the problem.
>> 
>> The warnings on individual apps that come out "randomly" are not a means
>> to know if you should or shouldn't upgrade.
>> 
>> The "Applications" tab in the System Profiler will list ALL 32 bit apps
>> (if you sort it by the bitness column) and that would be the only
>> comprehensive list of apps you need to consider.
>
> System Information (it hasn't been called System Profiler since Snow
> Leopard).
>
> And there is an even easier method: Mojave adds a "Legacy Software"
> category in System Information.
>
>> Remember that an app that is important but which you only use
>> irregularly may not be shown in the output from
>> defaults read com.apple.coreservices.uiagent
>
> I'm not concerned about applications I have now, but new ones I happen
> to run in the next year. I'm not going to go individually checking every
> new app I install, so this warning is very useful in that case because
> it draws my immediate attention to the fact that the new application
> won't work in future.
>
>> This is why I feel those random warnings are really useless. What Apple
>> should have done is generate a complete list of apps that are 32bits
>
> They have, in System Information > Legacy Software.
>
> It is even mentioned on the web page explaining the situation with
> support for 32-bit applications, which you get to read if you click the
> Learn More button in the alert that pops up when you run a 32-bit app
> for the first time (or the first time after 30 days since the last
> warning in Mojave).

He's been told this umpteen times by several people. 
He doesn't read.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#118581

In message <1nw1mfp.1thpfdnh4jmtN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>> On 2018-10-01 09:59, David Empson wrote:
>> 
>> > I will not have any sympathy if someone misuses this to stick their head
>> > in the sand and ignore the problem.
>> 
>> The warnings on individual apps that come out "randomly" are not a means
>> to know if you should or shouldn't upgrade.
>> 
>> The "Applications" tab in the System Profiler will list ALL 32 bit apps
>> (if you sort it by the bitness column) and that would be the only
>> comprehensive list of apps you need to consider.

> System Information (it hasn't been called System Profiler since Snow
> Leopard).

> And there is an even easier method: Mojave adds a "Legacy Software"
> category in System Information.

Thanks for the reminder, I forgot about that after al these months
running Mojave.

7z, AudiobookBuilder, and a spurious copy of Lord of the Rings Online
on this machine. Oh, and the BetterZipQL addon. Interesting for LOTRO,
it is only the launcher that is 32 bit.

>> Remember that an app that is important but which you only use
>> irregularly may not be shown in the output from
>> defaults read com.apple.coreservices.uiagent

> I'm not concerned about applications I have now, but new ones I happen
> to run in the next year. I'm not going to go individually checking every
> new app I install, so this warning is very useful in that case because
> it draws my immediate attention to the fact that the new application
> won't work in future.

>> This is why I feel those random warnings are really useless. What Apple
>> should have done is generate a complete list of apps that are 32bits

> They have, in System Information > Legacy Software.

And even before Mojave it was very easy to list the 32 bit apps,
something that has been covered on this very newsgroups many times. I
believe I even posted a quick command line one liner that would spit out
all the 32 bit apps and their paths.

-- 
He was Igor, son of Igor, nephew of several Igors, brother of Igors and
cousin of more Igors than he could remember without checking up in his
diary. Igors did not change a winning formula. {Footnote: Especially if
it was green, and bubbled.}

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#118565

In message <1nw0vkd.a7yai377vtnbN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <1nvzte8.jtni3b1xiar6mN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> David Empson
>> <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
>> > defaults write com.apple.coreservices.uiagent
>> > "CSUILast32BitPromptDate_v2 for CFBUNDLEIDENTIFIER" -date 2030-01-01
>> 
>> Someone, probably someone in this group, is you yo do this and then
>> pitch a shitfit in a year when 10.15 won't run any of xes 32 bit apps.

> I will not have any sympathy if someone misuses this to stick their head
> in the sand and ignore the problem.

>> But that is a pretty cool find.
>> 
>> All of my 32 bit aps are a store games and AudioBookBuilder, and I doubt
>> they will get updated.

> My main concern was a temporary workaround for one particular app
> (Beyond Compare) that is aiming to be 64-bit in time for 10.15 but it
> probably won't be there for several months (major rewrite in progress),
> and in the meantime will keep bugging me, so that particular problem is
> now solved (as long as Apple doesn't change the mechanism).

One thing I did note, when looking at the list of this entire key, it
listed apps that do not exist on my computer. Most notably TextWrangler,
which I haven't have installed for about a year.

-- 
“The female of all species are most dangerous when they appear to retreat.” 
   ― Don Marquis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#118575

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <1nw0vkd.a7yai377vtnbN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> David Empson <dempson
> @actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> >> In message <1nvzte8.jtni3b1xiar6mN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> David Empson
> >> <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> >> > defaults write com.apple.coreservices.uiagent
> >> > "CSUILast32BitPromptDate_v2 for CFBUNDLEIDENTIFIER" -date 2030-01-01

[...]

> One thing I did note, when looking at the list of this entire key, it
> listed apps that do not exist on my computer. Most notably TextWrangler,
> which I haven't have installed for about a year.

I was testing on a VM with only one 32-bit app I had just installed, so
no other entries to look at.

On my High Sierra system, the keys are all "CSUILast32BitPromptDate for
[cfbundleidentifier] ([version])", without the _v2 suffix. It appears to
only include 32-bit apps I've launched since running 10.13.4.

On my Mojave clone of my High Sierra system, where I've only run a few
of the 32-bit applications, I see the "_v2" variant (without version
number) for the ones I've launched in Mojave, and the same entries as
High Sierra for the ones I had previously launched in High Sierra and
already got the 32-bit warning.

Based on observed data, Mojave converts the old entry to _v2 as soon as
the application is launched. Some of my _v2 entries still have dates in
2018-04 or 2018-05 so not sure why they didn't warn again and update it
(Microsoft Word being one example - I have 2011 and 2008 installed and
remember launching 2008 but didn't finish launching 2011 because I did't
want to muck around with the activation).

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#118492

On 2018-09-27 11:20, Alan Browne wrote:
> 
> Can Mojave be installed under Fusion to test it?
> 
> I have some 32 bit apps for which I don't see 64 bit versions, as of 
> yet, and I want to see how they'll do under Mojave before I install it.
> 
> Thx.



Thanks for all replies.  Much Appreciated.



-- 
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants.  Proof that we
  need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
                                           - unknown protester

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web