To get your update OTA your hdd/ssd needs to be formatted APFS as it is the requirement for Mojave if you want to stay HFS you can download the latest DP and create a updated Mojave Patcher and install over the previous beta or do a clean install
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 10.14 Mojave on Unsupported Macs Thread
- Thread starter dosdude1
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
What do you mean by install the update normally? Right now, I see no updates to install, hence the reason for my post. Are you enrolling your Mac in the developer beta or public beta and installing like so? (is that what you mean?) Because as of now, after a fresh install, I see no pending OTA updates when I go to patch updater or within system preferences.
[doublepost=1535417862][/doublepost]
I formatted the drive to be APFS, yet still seem to be having the problem
Attachments
Got my SSD and installed it and installed Mojave on it no issues. Will format to APFS after moving all my files. Would it be smarter to have my HDD run El Capitan and use it as an external storage and have only Mojave on my SSD, or have a partition of my SSD be El Capitan and use my HDD as a Time Machine disk? I currently have no time machine backups, never needed it, but would it be smarter to have supported El Capitan on it or turn it into a time machine backup? Got no replies a few days ago.
You’re enrolled in the developer beta program seed correct?
yes I am, ok, thanks, wanted to make sure I understood that
If you’re running it on an APFS SSD volume and it says that you are enrolled in the developer seed program under the “Software Update” pane in system preferences, and no update is coming through when it should be, the only thing I can suggest is reinstalling the DeveloperBetaUtility file from Apple.
Yes.
[doublepost=1535423520][/doublepost]
Receiving OTA updates vis Software Update requires that your Mojave volume be formatted as APFS.
[doublepost=1535424212][/doublepost]
I would suggest that you format your SSD as APFS first, install Mojave second, then move your files. I didn't have much luck with a High Sierra installation on a HPFS+ volume that I converted to APFS.
Installed Mojave, migrated files, now converting to APFS and trying an OTA update. Everything has gone smoothly so far, so we will see. Any advice with the Time Machine vs running El Cap with all my big files?
After testing on my end, I cannot get Software Updates in System Preferences with a logical volume formatted as HFS + (macOS Extended Journaled). I then restored and "upgraded" it to Apple File System (APFS) and I received the Developer beta 9 update. Should I report this as a bug? Or is this a deprecation on their end?
[doublepost=1535428460][/doublepost]UPDATE ON MENU BAR BUG REPORT:
Engineering has requested the following information in order to further investigate this issue:
Are you using a GPU with Metal 2 support? Is so, please provide the model of the GPU card and its serial number. If the Mac has an integrated Intel Graphics Card, please provide a macOS sysdiagnose.
[doublepost=1535428460][/doublepost]UPDATE ON MENU BAR BUG REPORT:
Engineering has requested the following information in order to further investigate this issue:
Are you using a GPU with Metal 2 support? Is so, please provide the model of the GPU card and its serial number. If the Mac has an integrated Intel Graphics Card, please provide a macOS sysdiagnose.
It is indeed pure deprecation. Many have confirmed that updates will not come OTA on HFS+ disks, just APFS. I talked to an apple agent about HFS+ and APFS' future in Mojave and they told me that once it releases to the public, APFS will be required to run Mojave, but the developers at Apple are currently using HFS+ to develop Mojave, since APFS has proven to be buggy in the betas. As for if he is just spewing nonsense, only time will tell. However, this deprecation to HFS+ is a sign that in 10.14 or 10.15, HFS+ will be put to rest.
Apple is a massive fan of depreacting components, and they will continue to do so until they own every aspect. OpenCL/OpenGL, deprecated. HFS +, deprecated, this is only the beginning.
I can update through System Preferences > Install updates on my apfs ssd on an unsupported mac but on my supported system (cMP 5,1 with Sapphire Radeon RX 580 8GB) trying to update I get the following screen.
WTF???
Pressing the restart is also interesting - even though I do not have a apple graphics card I get a kind of boot selection screen? might this be used by someone with more skills than I have to emulate a boot selection screen for non apple cards? - at least until apple fixes this.
both these photos had to be taken with my iPhone as clearly screen capture was not working.
WTF???
Pressing the restart is also interesting - even though I do not have a apple graphics card I get a kind of boot selection screen? might this be used by someone with more skills than I have to emulate a boot selection screen for non apple cards? - at least until apple fixes this.
both these photos had to be taken with my iPhone as clearly screen capture was not working.
Attachments
Last edited:
Looks like this isn't going to get fixed unless someone at Apple is really merciful.
Apple of old, maybe, probably, Apple of new, doubt it, going to someone from MacRumors or Hackintosh community.
As this is a forum for unsupported machines I see no point in you reporting bugs to Apple using Feedback Assistant or some other method, this probably just gives them further information on how these machines are overcoming their install parameters and therefore probably allowing Apple an insight in how to further disable these machines in future releases of Mojave or later OS's.
Last edited:
Apple knows and does not care. They have a website on why you should not do this patcher tool: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201686
They just do not care, neither are they malign.
Could have stopped all the hackintosh scene a long time ago easily, same for older macOS on unsupported machines...
Thank you for your detailed reply, tonight I will install a clean copy of Mojave DP9 and try your suggestions.
Yes so by your own post indicating that Apple knows and does not care, then it seems even more pointless you reporting bugs to them.
Agree, probably Mojave APFS EFI script patch is doable, at the state of art it has already been done with Clover bootloader that has some variant of apfs.efi and apsfdriverloader.efi , but using Clover on real Mac is much more riskier than an APFS ROM patch on multiple EFI CHIP ID definitions.
Anyway to those who are not hungry to upgrade weekly their current Mojave beta, the Mojave Patcher offers the big chance to re-create a current USB Installer with HFS+ Installation, just refreshing it as @TimothyR734 has pointed some posts ago.
I would say luckily those who are on Mojave HFS+ don't run the risk to be forcedly converted into APFS drive resulting into an unbootable OS, so that's why is always useful to keep another previous High Sierra HFS+ (or minimum Sierra 10.12.6 HFS+) partition that is still capable to read/write an APFS volume to recover personal files in case.
[doublepost=1535446463][/doublepost]
I would keep a small partition with El Capitan on the internal disk, or better if you can, try to install a (Patched) Sierra 10.12.6 HFS+ that is the last MacOS capable of read/write and use Disk Utility on an APFS Volume container.
[doublepost=1535446609][/doublepost]
They asked for Metal 2 ? This does not promise anything good.
Don't worry your IntelHd4000 has minimum "GPUFamily 1 V3" set (check System Profiler/Information Graphics/Displays), while from Mojave it should have "GPUFamily1 v4" set, Metal 2 fully supported, so answer to them quietly. Be vague with them, send a screenshot of this zone "GPUFamily1 v4" System Information GUI app, GPU serial number should be "Device ID/Revision ID" or easier type this from Terminal and save into TextEdit file sending to them the resultant strings:
system_profiler SPDisplaysDataType
Here some interesting stuffs:
https://developer.apple.com/metal/
https://developer.apple.com/metal/Metal-Feature-Set-Tables.pdf (here CMD+F for "v3" without quotes looking at the purple tabs)
Last edited:
As expected. I have a couple of bug reports pending review and fully expect the nest stage to be similar to yours. Once they realize you are on an unsupported platform it all goes into the giant bitbucket in the sky...
EDIT: that's why I never reply with sysdiagnostics of my machine. Nor do I ever send beta feedback: it sends full details of your configuration back to Cupertino. It's just a shot in the dark that may tickle some bold engineer into looking into the matter...
Last edited:
If I have bootable installers, those can always read/write and use disk utility on APFS volumes correct? I think el cap is the safest way, since it’s actually supported on my device and requires no patching.
Yes, they have been fully aware of what goes on here for years. Nothing malicious on their part, just a question of priorities (which is set by management not engineers on the line) . It's understandable that, at some point, they need to drop support for older machines (making sure a new OS is compatible with a 10 year old machine is difficult and constraining) My beef with them is to open source more so that we can (more) easily maintain our old machines...
Not exactly, the minimum MacOS version required is Sierra 10.12.6 USB bootable Installer that still booting from HFS+ can handle read/write and diskutil on APFS Volume, so in your case you'd need a Sierra USB Patcher Installer, or HS Patcher one.
Even if is not more mentioned 10.12.6 does support APFS:
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208018
before it was written as:
APFS compatibility
- Devices formatted as HFS+ can be read and written to by devices formatted as APFS.
- Devices formatted as APFS can be read and written to by:
- Other APFS-formatted devices.
- HFS+ formatted devices running macOS 10.12.6 or later.
EDIT:
Just tested, and starting from Sierra 10.12.4 the APFS was already present in beta stage but working.
Last edited: