... which I did and here is the result: Full LAN, a WLAN trying to get any connection but then stopped. No re-activating possible.
Finally I can use Tahoe at least on LAN. Maybe you'll get any solution on WLAN.
Thank you very much.
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 Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Discussion
- Thread starter jshayya0184
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Finally I can use Tahoe at least on LAN. Maybe you'll get any solution on WLAN.
Thank you very much.
Thanks for the results. I realized that it is necessary to patch OCLP in the new version. But to use the new OCLP, you need to wait for the official release of the system.
Thanks for your massive help which makes Tahoa-life a little bit easier.
You're right: we all should wait to get hands on a new version of OCLP to be able to patch the usual way.
The sound definitely works.
I unpacked/installed the linked OCLP-Mod.pkg on the iMac, then opened the OC app and installed OC on a USB-flash drive.
It wasn't exactly trivial because of the Chinese characters, but in the end, I had an active, internal audio system.
Of course there was no Ethernet at this time anymore, but the audio worked.
Now, I need combining both functions under one OC.
So, I simply swapped the pure EFI folder with @idenis42's modifications to the rest of Laobamac's OCLP, and you won't believe it: that's it.
A functional OC with full Ethernet, half Wi-Fi and full audio. Not bad for a start.
Thanks Guys for your support, without which I wouldn't have achieved this.
A third-party, Chinese-language app claiming to be OCLP that root-patches my Mac. Where do I sign up?
Addendum to Mykola's departure from OCLP to Apple
Heise.de also noted this:
The project remains in good hands." macOS itself wishes Mykola "all the best in the future."
He'll likely have direct involvement with Apple's bug bounty program – though hopefully
not to the extent that patching becomes more difficult and OCLP fails less frequently.
Heise.de also noted this:
The project remains in good hands." macOS itself wishes Mykola "all the best in the future."
He'll likely have direct involvement with Apple's bug bounty program – though hopefully
not to the extent that patching becomes more difficult and OCLP fails less frequently.
Could not get past the screen for installing Tahoe on the Parallels-created small 18 GB partition — it showed an odd error message about not being a GUID partition. Gave up and will wait to install final on real Apple Silicon Mac.
Attachments
Last edited:
I understand what you're getting at.
I'm also a bit surprised, because until now, in my layman's understanding, I thought that the config.plist is the control center that controlled everything else, integrating kexts, etc.
Now, not only the config.plist, but the entire EFI folder in the ESP isn't from Laobamac, but comes from @idenis42. Only boot.efi & System come from Laobamac's OCLP-Mod.
Then it's surprising that the audio still works. Where does HDA still influence it?
I can only look at it from a logical perspective.
I don't have enough background knowledge for OC/OCLP, but you or @5T33Z0 do, to be able to analyze better and more deeply what the third-party, Chinese-language app is all about.
Well, technology moves on, and it's not like that your Mac will stop working. You'll even receive security updates for at least 2 more years. So I don't really see much harm done? Would it be nice that old machines would receive endless support? Maybe, but keep in mind that some technology just doesn't work on older hardware so either new technology wouldn't be adopted for a long time, or you get fragmentation within a single system release, which in the end leads to more bugs and incompatibilities as more code needs to be maintained. Also Apple in the past started dropping hardware when they had inherent security vulnerabilities in hardware code which weren't addressed by Intel anymore, so whatever Apple would have done they couldn't provide a "secure OS" by their regards. And as most costumers cannot be bothered with acknowledging they are on their own security wise as most would lack the fundamental understanding it's a rather logic step to discontinue a platform. It's a play between commercial viability, security, marketing and many other factors.
And if you keep in mind that by the end of security updates you got 9 years out of a base price ~600$ machine you spend just a little over 5$/month over a very valuable tool. - Not to mention that you could expand it's usefulness using Linux, as a home server or by selling it and even for a base machine still getting a quarter of it's original value after 9 years.
While waiting for OCLP's Tahoe update, I decided to try Ubuntu/Linux on a 128GB USB, on the Canonical Ubuntu website either of the downloads 24 or 25 gives this message. I am not a business user. Could OCLP be causing this. Are there other options. Thanks for any help or advice.
Attachments
It looks like you are just trying to open the image in MacOS. Read the install instructions on the website. You should be creating a USB installer disk and booting off that if you want to try and run/install Ubuntu.
Alternatively you could try running an Ubuntu VM from within MacOS if you have Parallels or some other virtualization tool.
Personally I prefer Mint or straight Debian to Ubuntu, but Ubuntu should run fine on most Mac hardware.
Thanks I will give the instructions a try, I just assumed it would open on the desktop. I thought about Mint but it seems to download from Mirrors.
Last edited:
Can you believe that reading the install instructions has allowed me to post this from UBUNTU on a 128 GB USB3, it went well and I can now explore endlessly. At least until OCLP Tahoe gets here. What a pleasant surprise. Thank You.
Regarding OCLP mod: it's a fork of Dortania's OCLP with some changes, so it can be executed on macOS Tahoe. Besides that some changes were made to bring back AppleHDA, so on-board audio works again. Additional, some minor changes to Modern WiFi patching were made from what I can deduce from the changes commited to the source code.
In my opinion, it's not suited for running on real Macs if your Mac requires iGPU and/or GPU patches.
So I suggest you wait until Dortania provides an official update of OCLP!
In my opinion, it's not suited for running on real Macs if your Mac requires iGPU and/or GPU patches.
So I suggest you wait until Dortania provides an official update of OCLP!
I would suggest refraining from discussing any OCLP forks here to stay reasonably on topic.
To begin with it might confuse beginners and cause severe security issues beyond the scope of the original and legit OCLP. Please start a new thread if you want to discuss it.
To begin with it might confuse beginners and cause severe security issues beyond the scope of the original and legit OCLP. Please start a new thread if you want to discuss it.
I think that it is very helpful to discuss any progress being made to enable Tahoe on unsupported Macs. The OCLP forks are discussed in other threads, where some users are immediately installing the OCLP fork even though they don't know anything about its security and integrity. Crazy, isn't it?
At least here, we can create awareness and explain that installing OCLP from any source comes with risks. Everyone should learn that just because a binary file is posted in GitHub doesn't make it "open source" for easy vetting, validation and verification. If you can't see inside of a binary, posting the binary on GitHub doesn't make it any safer.
If someone has time, I'd love to hear how you inspected and vetted the Universal-Binaries.dmg binaries in the OCLP fork before you installed it on your Mac.
EDIT: If someone does want to create another thread, maybe the distinction between the two threads should be one thread for those who want to use OCLP as a black box without understanding the internals and another thread for those who want to know what they are installing and how it works.
At least here, we can create awareness and explain that installing OCLP from any source comes with risks. Everyone should learn that just because a binary file is posted in GitHub doesn't make it "open source" for easy vetting, validation and verification. If you can't see inside of a binary, posting the binary on GitHub doesn't make it any safer.
If someone has time, I'd love to hear how you inspected and vetted the Universal-Binaries.dmg binaries in the OCLP fork before you installed it on your Mac.
EDIT: If someone does want to create another thread, maybe the distinction between the two threads should be one thread for those who want to use OCLP as a black box without understanding the internals and another thread for those who want to know what they are installing and how it works.
Last edited:
Well you aree of course making sense and it would appear you are a bit of a pro on the subject, and I was maybe a tad more focused on people who come in and hit the binaries unknowingly and who will not read the fine print.
Mixing up reasonably clean and documented binaries such as real OCLP with clearly less serious ones just seems careless to me.
This thread could at least have been a bit of a safe-ish space in dangerous times (one binary to track), especially as OCLP as prior discussions tell, has some security issues on its own. But I hear you. And I peacefully disagree. For me this thread has lately become close to unreadable so I am not reading it much anymore because of the noise.
Ah well that would be my take on it. No more on the subject from me.
It has been a good few years.
Be safe be well.
Last edited:
The title of this thread is "macOS Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Discussion"
I assumed the "Discussion" meant exactly that ("discussion" is absent from the other unsupported thread titles). If others don't want the discussion in this thread, I'm fine with that.
EDIT: I thought there would be a new "macOS Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Thread" but I agree that would get confusing.
I assumed the "Discussion" meant exactly that ("discussion" is absent from the other unsupported thread titles). If others don't want the discussion in this thread, I'm fine with that.
EDIT: I thought there would be a new "macOS Tahoe 26 on Unsupported Macs Thread" but I agree that would get confusing.
I would hate to run against you in a debate! You are right about 'Discussion' or 'Thread', but the knife you use for splitting hairs must be very finely honed. I agree with you that I thought we'd have "...Unsupported Macs Thread" but there it is. Your take is always entertaining and welcome, but on this, I am with @houser.