macOS 10.14 Mojave on Unsupported Macs Thread

[honglong1976]

Hi everyone,

I have a Macbook Pro - Mid 2009 running dosdudes patched Mojave.

The SSD is currently on Mac OS Extended.

Am I right in thinking the APFS ROM patcher can be run, then the SSD converted to APFS via disk utility?

thanks for anyone who reads and replies. Really appreciated.

 

[avz]

Hi everyone,

I have a Macbook Pro - Mid 2009 running dosdudes patched Mojave.

The SSD is currently on Mac OS Extended.

Am I right in thinking the APFS ROM patcher can be run, then the SSD converted to APFS via disk utility?

thanks for anyone who reads and replies. Really appreciated.

You are correct. Keep in mind that APFS ROM patcher is a risky business, especially for the machines with MCP79 chipset(your MBP).

 

[honglong1976]

You are correct. Keep in mind that APFS ROM patcher is a risky business, especially for the machines with MCP79 chipset(your MBP).

Thanks

I will run it later. If it detects, great! If it doesn't and gives me multiple options, I will leave it.

Thanks for replying.

 

[Vyzantion]

The numbers are still seem to be the same 166/2103/1.41. I re-installed High Sierra yesterday as well and the numbers are still the same. Obviously I stayed away from the T2 chip update.

Do you have a laptop? What on Earth is going on with that update? It makes no sense at all.

 

[jackluke]

Has anyone tried making the installation an effective no-op on unsupported machines by removing the lines...

<pkg-ref id="com.apple.pkg.FirmwareUpdate" installKBytes="0" version="10.14.5.1"/>
<pkg-ref id="com.apple.pkg.macOSBrain" installKBytes="166" version="10.14.5.1.1.1558072702"/>
<pkg-ref id="com.apple.pkg.update.os.10.14.5Supplemental.18F203" installKBytes="279550" version="1.0.0.0.1.1558072702"/>
<pkg-ref id="com.apple.pkg.EmbeddedOSFirmware" installKBytes="62086" version="10.14.5.1.1.1558072702"/>
<pkg-ref id="com.apple.pkg.SecureBoot" installKBytes="374" version="10.14.5.1.1.1558072702"/>
<pkg-ref id="com.apple.pkg.macOSUpd10.14.5Supplemental.RecoveryHDUpdate.18F203" installKBytes="0" version="1.0.0.0"/>

from the installer-gui-script section of the Distribution file such that only a receipt for the 10.14.5 Supplemental Update gets installed to shut up Software Update on this one?

Agree, there are many scripts on GitHub that from an apple sucatalog will allow to fetch, download and create a custom Update.pkg for unsupported Mac. But essentially the steps are the same automatized as manual editing the "Distribution" file and "flatten" a new custom package, however this works.

What you suggested is feasible since just requires to hijack the Mojave's Software Update sucatalog to a custom sucatalog .

Here is a very useful example how-to: https://pikeralpha.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/catalogurl-for-macos-10-13-high-sierra/

 

[Vyzantion]

The numbers are still seem to be the same 166/2103/1.41. I re-installed High Sierra yesterday as well and the numbers are still the same. Obviously I stayed away from the T2 chip update.

Have you had any suspicious slowdowns, especially before shutdown? Or slow boot time?

 

[jackluke]

Thank you JackLuke. It seems is downloaded in my mac. Any step in order to delete it? or any advice to "forget" this updates?

This should be the path where apple channels temporary downloads caches are stored: /private/var/folders/zz/

but if you already downloaded I guess at next reboot/power-on it will install itself without warning, anyway others have already installed this supplemental update and it doesn't destroy the unsupported Mac, only issue from what I read is that makes it slower in core processes with bad RAM management.

 

[saudor]

View attachment 838542 View attachment 838540 View attachment 838541 Wouldnt you agree this is nuts memory usage? Normally, before todays supplemental update, which is the only change, I would hover around 30-50% memory usage. That was with multiple tabs open, a music player going with the entire song loaded into ram, etc... Now I have one tab open in Safari and that's it, nothing. My RAM is FULL.

I just noticed this too but this is with the 10.14.3 supplemental update. There's nothing open and im at 50-75% memory pressure. The only difference is I used the 1.3.2 patcher instead of the 1.2.3. Ive had 10.14.3 in the past before and it was ok with the older version of the patcher

EDIT: looks like 10.14.3 supplemental update is the issue and the original 10.14.3 was fine.

the system is pretty slow overall too

EDIT: downgraded to 10.14.2.

 

[avz]

Do you have a laptop? What on Earth is going on with that update? It makes no sense at all.

Have you had any suspicious slowdowns, especially before shutdown? Or slow boot time?

I have MacBook5,1. No idea.
Just normal slowdowns before shutdown after the update. High Sierra did run at 100%+ CPU usage for 20 min after the critical updates. I believe that was just a forced MRT scan.

 

[Echo619]

What's the current situation with the iMac's with HD6xxx series GPU's? Anyone here attempted an install even with all the bugs stated in the OP?

 

[jackluke]

I just noticed this too but this is with the 10.14.3 supplemental update. There's nothing open and im at 50-75% memory pressure. The only difference is I used the 1.3.2 patcher instead of the 1.2.3. Ive had 10.14.3 in the past before and it was ok with the older version of the patcher

the system is pretty slow overall too

That's true, I noticed that too, since the 10.14.3 Supplemental Update overall performance has decreased and RAM/memory usage has increased, while 10.14.3 (without Supplemental) was almost perfect, and I still have a 10.14.2 install and it's ultra-fast even on a spinning non-ssd disk (boot time 30 seconds) with RAM usage in idle around 1,5 Gb, so before .3 18D109 things were much better on unsupported Mac.

 

[saudor]

That's true, I noticed that too, since the 10.14.3 Supplemental Update overall performance has decreased and RAM/memory usage has increased, while 10.14.3 (without Supplemental) was almost perfect, and I still have a 10.14.2 install and it's ultra-fast even on a spinning non-ssd disk (boot time 30 seconds) with RAM usage in idle around 1,5 Gb, so before .3 18D109 things were much better on unsupported Mac.

yeah i just rolled back to 10.14.2 and the system blazes and the memory pressure is barely there. 18D109 also boots alot slower too.

 

[jackluke]

yeah i just rolled back to 10.14.2 and the system blazes and the memory pressure is barely there. 18D109 also boots alot slower too.

If you find the 10.14.3 18D42 (without supplemental update) it behaves almost the same as 10.14.2 , but definitely 10.14.2 is the fastest Mojave version for unsupported Mac, lightweight in memory handling and kernel tasks.

 

[saudor]

If you find the 10.14.3 18D42 (without supplemental update) it behaves almost the same as 10.14.2 , but definitely 10.14.2 is the fastest Mojave version for unsupported Mac, lightweight in memory handling and kernel tasks.

yeah i have the regular 10.14.3 installer.app and was running that once upon a time before the upgrade to 10.14.4. If .2 is going to be better, im not seeing much of a reason going to .3

 

[jasoncarle]

I did the only logical thing, and ordered more RAM. I will max my Mini to 16GB for the rest of its life. Of course, I have bought a new MBP just before the upgrade... such is life.

 

[antibolo]

Finally bit the bullet and ran the APFS ROM patcher on my MBP 5,1. Gonna go full APFS Mojave now.

I assume FileVault-encrypted APFS boot volume works fine with a patched ROM, right?

 

[TimothyR734]

as Long as file vault is disabled while you use the APFS Rom tool and receive updates

 

[antibolo]

as Long as file vault is disabled while you use the APFS Rom tool and receive updates

I don't understand what you mean?

I shouldn't need to run the ROM patcher again, don't I?

And what does "disabling FileVault when receiving updates" even mean?

I'm only more confused now.

 

[TimothyR734]

if you already used the APFS Rom patcher then you are good as far as macOS Mojave updates you might not be able to install them

 

[DuncanGarp]

Update issue.

Here's my setup sequence for an unsupported MacBookAir4,2.

I was on 10.14.5 Final and decided to test the latest beta (10.14.6 beta 1). So I signed up for Developers Beta program.
Upon reboot, I was presented with the Mojave 10.14.5 supplemental update. I do not want this update this since first of all, my said device does not have a T2 chip, and read in this thread that it poised some issues if you do.

How can I bypass this supplemental update and update straight to the developer's beta 1 of 10.14.6?

Thanks for any input.

An update to this situation:

It seems that overnight, the supplemental update was installed, even if I unchecked the update box.



And, although this device is enrolled on the developers' beta program, the 10.14.6 beta 1 still does not appear!

Oh well. Still looking for alternative ways. I need to test beta versions before it goes final.
Thanks again @TimothyR734 and others for your suggestions.

 

[antibolo]

if you already used the APFS Rom patcher then you are good as far as macOS Mojave updates you might not be able to install them

Well I guess I'm gonna try anyway.

 

[TimothyR734]

you could try using this switch to the public beta then back to dev beta program see that helps

 

[antibolo]

I just enabled FileVault and then after the next reboot I can't get into my system at all, my login is refused, and even the recovery key doesn't work.

Unlocking the volume from the Disk Utility on my USB install drive works though, so I know the volume itself is fine, it's just the login screen that is broken.

What the hell? Can I really not use FileVault with APFS at all, even with a patched ROM??!

 

[the.burn]

Any ideas of a patch that discourages Software Update from thinking a T2 supplemental update is needed on our machines?
@dosdude1

 

[Vyzantion]

I have MacBook5,1. No idea.
Just normal slowdowns before shutdown after the update. High Sierra did run at 100%+ CPU usage for 20 min after the critical updates. I believe that was just a forced MRT scan.

I meant the Thursday, not the day the updates were installed.