Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
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.
Hey Roysterdoyster,

I also had a problem with getting the backlight patch to work. I uninstalled the root patches and then installed them but without result. I erased Lab Tick, unstalled the root patches again, rebooted and installed them and tada, keyboard backlight as it came out of the box ??!

Maybe this does the trick for you too?
Thank you, HowowcanIgo, your inventiveness solved the issue.
Awesome, great post!
 
Two different stories:

1. Zero firmware patching applies to the fact that OpenCore supports non APFS machines without patching the firmware.

2. Having the latest official Apple firmware installed on your Mac can enable APFS, obviously BT and WiFi functionality and possibly more.

One should assume all Macs have in every case the most recent firmware installed. This is easy for all pre 2012 models, since these systems do not get any macOS updates and so any firmware updates.

All 2012+ systems should check after each Catalina security update for firmware updates and apply those. This applies to all systems supported by Apple with Big Sur, but not longer with Monterey and so on…
So, the docs are not accurate as posted? Or a newbie comment is lacking pertinent info? MCP79 Macs run everything without firmware updates or spoofing, a fact.

barefoot.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
So, the docs are not accurate as posted? Or a newbie comment is lacking pertinent info? MCP79 Macs run everything without firmware updates or spoofing, a fact.
You are confusing dosdude1 apfs firmware patching (which OCLP does not need and the docs are referring to) with the need of keeping the firmware up to date. The docs are fine, your interpretation is not.

OCLP does certainly not substitute (still upcoming) firmware upgrades offered by Apple magically. The rule of thumb was and is: keep it up to date.
 
Quick question: If everything is working well for me on 0.3.1 with default minimal spoofing settings, is there a compelling reason to switch to the "spoofless" configuration, or to even update OCLP at all?

I tried 0.4.2 and it kept hanging during boot, so I reverted to 0.3.1

But I typically take the "If it isn't broken, don't fix it" approach.

I'm just wondering if spoofless gives some other benefits for a non-technical end user (i.e. better performance or greater compatibility)

Thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
Just used OCLP 0.4.2 to install 12.2.1 on my late 2012 iMac. Created installer USB, installed OCLP to USB, booted and installed great. Post patched and installed OCSP onto internal disk. Well chuffed!!

Question: I now want to install it on my late 2014 iMac retina. As I already have the USB installer, should I just be able to re-use that USB by building the OCLP on the 2014 and install it to the USB and boot to install monty?

Does OCLP mess with the monty installer files it copies to USB?

Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
Just used OCLP 0.4.2 to install 12.2.1 on my late 2012 iMac. Created installer USB, installed OCLP to USB, booted and installed great. Post patched and installed OCSP onto internal disk. Well chuffed!!

Question: I now want to install it on my late 2014 iMac retina. As I already have the USB installer, should I just be able to re-use that USB by building the OCLP on the 2014 and install it to the USB and boot?
Yes
Does OCLP mess with the installer files it copies to USB?
No
 
Do you need run OCLP re-built again after update?
There is no general answer. If you find in the release notes of a new version of OCLP something interesting (like a bug fixed or a feature added) read and follow the online docs how to upgrade. I believe the same message has been included there.

So it is all about reading and following docs - as with every other technical device. The programmers spent a lot of time on software and documentation, so it would be nice to honor both.
 
Last edited:
I have a late-2013 15" MBP with a smashed screen (connected to my TV via HDMI) that I occasionally use as a backup computer.

I decided to upgrade it from Big Sur to Monterey just for fun. It was an easy process. I ran the OCLP GUI and created a Monterey 12.2 boot disk. It upgraded my laptop to Monterey without any issues at all.

At first I didn't realise I had to boot with the "option" key pressed the first time after installing OCLP to the internal SSD (with "Show boot picker" untagged) but that was really the only bit of confusion I had, and even that only lasted a few seconds.

After booting my laptop normally, I then installed 12.2.1 using the standard "System Preferences" method and it installed just as it would have on a fully supported Mac.

Very impressed!
 
Thank you, HowowcanIgo, your inventiveness solved the issue.
Awesome, great post!
Er, I'm not sure what's happening but after sleep the patch seems to be gone and the backlight is dead again... Maybe after rebooting too. I'm not sure at the moment.
The fans are also spinning like crazy as they did after installing OCLP 0.4.2 on Monterey 12.2.... It could well be I still don't understand the updating process when using OCLP ?.

*Edit: I've tried en tried uninstalling and installing the patches... After uninstalling and rebooting it mostly didn't uninstall the patches it seems as the transparency was still there.
I uninstalled the patched multiple times after another and the installed them again. I thought that fixed things and before sleep it did. After sleep the keyboard backlight was dead again.
*Edit 2: I'm an idiot ?. The keys didn't work because there was enough light in the room. Although I think I remember I could active it even if this was the case but then again, my memory's fading ?.

Another thanks to the developers!
 
Last edited:
Whats the deal with OCLP and Carbon Copy Cloner? Do I need to install OCLP on the EFI of my backup disk to allow me to boot from it in an emergency? Or does CCC copy the EFI from the source disk to the destination disk automagically?
 
  • Like
Reactions: roysterdoyster
Er, I'm not sure what's happening but after sleep the patch seems to be gone and the backlight is dead again... Maybe after rebooting too. I'm not sure at the moment.
The fans are also spinning like crazy as they did after installing OCLP 0.4.2 on Monterey 12.2.... It could well be I still don't understand the updating proces when using OCLP ?.
The fans on my machine came on full during the upgrade, but that's a good sign. It means the upgrade process is going as fast as it can :) If the fans didn't come on it'd mean it's being lazy and not stressing the CPU enough!
 
Do I need to install OCLP on the EFI of my backup disk to allow me to boot from it in an emergency?

- OCLP EFI can sit on USB stick/SD card
- At boot picker stage you can select booting from alternate disk (if you have bootable back up)

For me, the age of bootable back up disk has passed; I don't see the need for them. Time machine suffice.
 
Not sure.

The spoofing by earlier versions of OCLP makes it difficult to tell. Note how the firmware got jacked to max value 999.x.x.x.x

Your should update OCLP to latest, which is spoof-less, and check again.
Thanks, removed the "minimal" spoofing and updated the on-disk OCLP config, rebooted and re-ran SL. Question - how do I now get the latest EFI firmware?
1644592798271.png
 
Last edited:
You are confusing dosdude1 apfs firmware patching (which OCLP does not need and the docs are referring to) with the need of keeping the firmware up to date. The docs are fine, your interpretation is not.

OCLP does certainly not substitute (still upcoming) firmware upgrades offered by Apple magically. The rule of thumb was and is: keep it up to date.
lol Now, you are confused. Where is the dosdude bootROM patcher mentioned? The point is - the dortania headline needs claification or deletion because as written it misleads the newbies and those taking it as written. Also, certain useful now-anecdotal assumptions need to be included into the 'Scriptures' in the proper context. A suggestion? ?‍♂️
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.