Sidebar Sidebar
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

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.
For us, users of old Hackintoshers who managed to get Mojave running on 2008 hardware, one issue needs to be addressed. We use Clover+FakeSMC to boot macOS on the installer and on the installed OS. The Dosdude1 patch works on top of Clover+FakeSMC. Those two automaticly create a System Definition mask, to make macOS see the PC as a supported Mac. Until now, the Dosdude1 patch took this System Definition mask for real and allowed to patch the Hackintoshes as old Macs. I have read that, a few pages ago, Dosdude1 himself said he shall remove some patches from Macs that support High Sierra. So, if Clover+FakeSMC create a System Definition mask of a Mac that supports High Sierra, the Dosdude1 patch shall not work anymore. Am I right? I am asking @dosdude1 himself if this is correct and, if so, to restore the patches. Clover+FakeSMC automaticly creates the iMac 10.1 System Definitions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
View attachment 778734 View attachment 778733 View attachment 778733
pkouame said:
Pas de quoi!
Click to expand...

I would like to thank you all for this fantastic collaborative work, initiated by @ Dodude1 ...

The participation of everyone brings a small stone to the common building.

As we say in French: continuons le combat !

Merci encore,
[doublepost=1535654278][/doublepost]Just a question :

With the APFS rom patcher installed, is it normal to see, at each reboot, the "verbose list " displaying ?

Thank's

PJN
 

Attachments

  • À_propos_de_ce_Mac.jpg
    À_propos_de_ce_Mac.jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 225
  • Utilitaire_de_disque_et_macOS_10_14_Mojave.jpg
    Utilitaire_de_disque_et_macOS_10_14_Mojave.jpg
    39.6 KB · Views: 290
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ASentientBot, jackluke, Tuli and 1 other person
Vyzantion said:
For us, users of old Hackintoshers who managed to get Mojave running on 2008 hardware, one issue needs to be addressed. We use Clover+FakeSMC to boot macOS on the installer and on the installed OS. The Dosdude1 patch works on top of Clover+FakeSMC. Those two automaticly create a System Definition mask, to make macOS see the PC as a supported Mac. Until now, the Dosdude1 patch took this System Definition mask for real and allowed to patch the Hackintoshes as old Macs. I have read that, a few pages ago, Dosdude1 himself said he shall remove some patches from Macs that support High Sierra. So, if Clover+FakeSMC create a System Definition mask of a Mac that supports High Sierra, the Dosdude1 patch shall not work anymore. Am I right? I am asking @dosdude1 himself if this is correct and, if so, to restore the patches. Clover+FakeSMC automaticly creates the iMac 10.1 System Definitions.
Click to expand...
Regardless of the model you select, you can always simply tick the patches manually in the post-install tool. No essential patches have been removed.
[doublepost=1535659557][/doublepost]
olrik77 said:
View attachment 778734 View attachment 778733 View attachment 778733

I would like to thank you all for this fantastic collaborative work, initiated by @ Dodude1 ...

The participation of everyone brings a small stone to the common building.

As we say in French: continuons le combat !

Merci encore,
[doublepost=1535654278][/doublepost]Just a question :

With the APFS rom patcher installed, is it normal to see, at each reboot, the "verbose list " displaying ?

Thank's

PJN
Click to expand...
No, just set your Startup Disk to the APFS volume using System Preferences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ASentientBot and TimothyR734
dosdude1 said:
Regardless of the model you select, you can always simply tick the patches manually in the post-install tool. No essential patches have been removed.
[doublepost=1535659557][/doublepost]
No, just set your Startup Disk to the APFS volume using System Preferences.
Click to expand...
So, is there a difference in boot behaviour i.e. what you see on screen, between having a patched BootROM and having a post-installed APFS patch? I'd assumed, by watching your YT video of the APFS patch on a MBP5,1 running HS that if you had the post-install patch installed, you'd always see verbose output. And if you'd actually patched the BootROM it would boot silently, as normal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ASentientBot and TimothyR734
mrploppy said:
So, is there a difference in boot behaviour i.e. what you see on screen, between having a patched BootROM and having a post-installed APFS patch? I'd assumed, by watching your YT video of the APFS patch on a MBP5,1 running HS that if you had the post-install patch installed, you'd always see verbose output. And if you'd actually patched the BootROM it would boot silently, as normal.
Click to expand...
The verbose output portion only needs to happen if your BootROM does not support APFS. Once you add APFS support to your BootROM using APFS ROM Patcher, you no longer need to use the verbose boot implementation. It will be able to boot just like any machine that natively supports APFS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: olad and ASentientBot
dosdude1 said:
The verbose output portion only needs to happen if your BootROM does not support APFS. Once you add APFS support to your BootROM using APFS ROM Patcher, you no longer need to use the verbose boot implementation. It will be able to boot just like any machine that natively supports APFS.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's as I thought but I'm sensing there may be some confusion over the terms APFS ROM Patcher and APFS Post-Install patch. It wasn't clear to me which @olrik77 was asking about. I'm guessing he's referring to the post-install patch, seeing as he's getting verbose output, but he called it "APFS rom patcher".
 
  • Like
Reactions: ASentientBot and TimothyR734
Screwed up my courage and flashed the EEPROM on my MacPro 3,1 which went swimmingly. The actual flash was crazy fast compared to what has been described here. I doubt it took more than five minutes for the entire process on a 16 Gb dual quad core with SanDisk 3D SSD.

I am seeing one oddity which may have been mentioned here already. I have four drives. One installed with Ubuntu Linux (with the EFI boot files transferred to that drive), one with Windows 10, one with an HFS installation of patched HS and one with a APFS installation of Mojave (which had been installed with the APFS patch). I mounted the Mojave EFI and deleted the "/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI", startup.nsh, and apfs.efi files. After restarting, hitting the option key for the boot selector shows the "Mojave HD" APFS volume now but I also see a second boot.efi drive besides the one for the previous Linux partition. This second boot.efi drive seems to be identical to the one created by the APFS patched Mojave install. Prior to the APFS patched Mojave install, I only had the one boot.efi device in the boot selector (which I have an Ubuntu icon associated with so I can always tell it apart). Weird that there seems to be some trace left of the APFS patched installation.

I guess this weekend that I'll have to try repartitioning the Mojave drive completely and reinstalling without the APFS patch to see if that makes the 'ghost' boot.efi device disappear from the option boot selector.

ps In the Disk Startup system preference panel, I only see the three expected boot volumes (the HFS HS on an SSD, the APFS Mojave on a HD and the Bootcamp Windows). The Ubuntu Linux doesn't show up in the Disk Startup because they don't install bogus blessed system files on a HFS partition for that to work.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ASentientBot and TimothyR734
dosdude1 said:
Regardless of the model you select, you can always simply tick the patches manually in the post-install tool. No essential patches have been removed.
Click to expand...
Thank for the reply. The model choose by Clover, iMac 10.1, I found out it is supported by High Sierra. I am more chill now.
I am using APFS on an old HDD. Seems to work fine. Checking it for errors takes longer on Disk Utility then the slave HDD, that is still on HFS+ since El Capitan at least. I am still not sure if this solution I found is due to the apfs.efi from Multibeast edition of Clover (copied from the OS in install) or due the new Clover build-in APFS support. If some Clover developer or someone from Tonymacx86 is watching this, please reply. I am using the Multibeast tweaked edition for High Sierra, the standard one, for Mojave, does not work. It makes sense, since the Dosdude1 patch is designed to work with older hardware, compatible with High Sierra. This means I shall use the Multibeast tweaked Clover even after the first version tweaked for Mojave will appear, then install over it the latest official Clover package, to preserve the tweaks, but on the latest version. This on both the installer pen drive and on the finished OS. Unibeast, the tool made to create the pen drive from Tonymacx86, will not be usable, only Clover from Multibeast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
Strange. I used the nuclear option to get rid of the current Mojave partitions with 'gpt destroy' and reformatted it as APFS which eliminated the stray 'boot efi' icon in the boot selector. However repeating the full patched Mojave installation on a APFS ROM patched MacPro 3,1 but not using the APFS patches in Majave Patcher, still produces this extra 'boot efi' icon in the option boot selector in addition to the icon for the Mojave APFS volume name. I am hoping this isn't a glitch from the APFS ROM fixes but rather some side effect of the recovery partition not being handled yet. Has anyone tried to boot the 'boot efi' device instead of the Majove volume itself from the boot selector?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ASentientBot and TimothyR734
jhowarth said:
Strange. I used the nuclear option to get rid of the current Mojave partitions with 'gpt destroy' and reformatted it as APFS which eliminated the stray 'boot efi' icon in the boot selector. However repeating the full patched Mojave installation on a APFS ROM patched MacPro 3,1 but not using the APFS patches in Majave Patcher, still produces this extra 'boot efi' icon in the option boot selector in addition to the icon for the Mojave APFS volume name. I am hoping this isn't a glitch from the APFS ROM fixes but rather some side effect of the recovery partition not being handled yet. Has anyone tried to boot the 'boot efi' device instead of the Majove volume itself from the boot selector?
Click to expand...
Yes as that is the only choice I have when using the APFS patch in post install and its slow very unresponsive as I have tried the APFS ROM patcher tool and can't find my eeprom
 
TimothyR734 said:
Yes as that is the only choice I have when using the APFS patch in post install and its slow very unresponsive as I have tried the APFS ROM patcher tool and can't find my eeprom
Click to expand...

This is with the APFS ROM patcher installed but without the APFS post patching. To answer my previous question, selecting the 'boot efi' boot selector icon boots the same Mojave volume that is present under its own boot selector icon. I assume this implies that the APFS ROM patches will produce a duplicate boot selector icon under the generic name of 'boot efi' for each bootable APFS volume on a drive (eg APFS HS and APFS Mojave).

On the positive side, at least this glitch doesn't extend into the Startup Disk preference which only shows each bootable APFS volume one under the APFS ROM patches.
[doublepost=1535675847][/doublepost]
TimothyR734 said:
Yes as that is the only choice I have when using the APFS patch in post install and its slow very unresponsive as I have tried the APFS ROM patcher tool and can't find my eeprom
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, what Mac hardware is this on that the EEPROM is unidentified?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
jhowarth said:
This is with the APFS ROM patcher installed but without the APFS post patching. To answer my previous question, selecting the 'boot efi' boot selector icon boots the same Mojave volume that is present under its own boot selector icon. I assume this implies that the APFS ROM patches will produce a duplicate boot selector icon under the generic name of 'boot efi' for each bootable APFS volume on a drive (eg APFS HS and APFS Mojave).

On the positive side, at least this glitch doesn't extend into the Startup Disk preference which only shows each bootable APFS volume one under the APFS ROM patches.
[doublepost=1535675847][/doublepost]

Out of curiosity, what Mac hardware is this on that the EEPROM is unidentified?
Click to expand...
On my mid 2009 MacBook 5,2 I bought it used and was flashed with a bootrom not for this MacBook I think the MacBook Pro late 2009 as when I did get the first version of the APFS Rom Patcher it gave me 6 choice for the eeprom model so I backed out of proceeding further
 
My bluetooth is gone.

I previously upgraded my wireless/bluetooth with a Quickertek mcard 2.0 (http://www.welovemacs.com/apwipr1.html) https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ted-macs-thread.1977128/page-82#post-23305225 and all was well after using Dosdude's High Sierra tool. I was runnng the latest release of High Sierra prior to upgrading to Mojave using the new Dosdude app.

My MacBookPro 4,1 2008 17" was just updated successfully and I also ran the post install app. Wireless is working but bluetooth is missing/greyed-out after several restarts.

Any suggestions are welcome. (???I may need to re-install a driver that was overwritten???)

The Quickertek QT1.app I will try to attach was the previous app that configured the mcard 2 to run under 10.13 High Sierra on my MBP 4,1
 

Attachments

  • QT1.app.zip
    54.5 KB · Views: 155
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
schwab said:
My bluetooth is gone.

I previously upgraded my wireless/bluetooth with a Quickertek mcard 2.0 (http://www.welovemacs.com/apwipr1.html) https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ted-macs-thread.1977128/page-82#post-23305225 and all was well after using Dosdude's High Sierra tool. I was runnng the latest release of High Sierra prior to upgrading to Mojave using the new Dosdude app.

My MacBookPro 4,1 2008 17" was just updated successfully and I also ran the post install app. Wireless is working but bluetooth is missing/greyed-out after several restarts.

Any suggestions are welcome. (???I may need to re-install a driver that was overwritten???)

The Quickertek QT1.app I will try to attach was the previous app that configured the mcard 2 to run under 10.13 High Sierra on my MBP 4,1
Click to expand...

Try reinstalling the third party Bluetooth software altogether. The application may still exist while underlying kexts might not.

If that doesn't work, try manually loading the kext (I can give you further directions if necessary) and see what it outputs. It's possible that the drivers/kexts have an incompatibility with Mojave that we can work around somehow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
mrploppy said:
Thanks. That's as I thought but I'm sensing there may be some confusion over the terms APFS ROM Patcher and APFS Post-Install patch. It wasn't clear to me which @olrik77 was asking about. I'm guessing he's referring to the post-install patch, seeing as he's getting verbose output, but he called it "APFS rom patcher".
Click to expand...
Nope !
I make a clean install of Mojave Beta9 on my SSD (HFS+ journaled), then I ran the APFS rom patcher (not the post install patch),and at the end, I convert the SSD in APFS...and I see the verbose output when booting...
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
I’m getting a few OpenCL errors when working in Pixelmator and Adobe apps. Xcode is very slow and I’m not having a good experience. Screen was flickering- and that’s not a hardware issue- as my screen is new. After downgrading to macOS High Sierra, everything is working well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
visberry said:
I’m getting a few OpenCL errors when working in Pixelmator and Adobe apps. Xcode is very slow and I’m not having a good experience. Screen was flickering- and that’s not a hardware issue- as my screen is new. After downgrading to macOS High Sierra, everything is working well.
Click to expand...
What version of Xcode were you using I am using beta 6 of Xcode no issues
 
  • Like
Reactions: visberry
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