Jump to content

TypeThree

Members
  • Content Count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TypeThree

  • Rank
    InsanelyMac Protégé

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    I wouldn't recommend that... On that platform try OpenCore instead.
  2. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    Yes, works perfectly fine with the provided files from my post above and both dedicated and integrated GPU (HD4600):
  3. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    @uglyJoeThe attached files should comply with all the things we figured out: Patched Ozmosis XMAX for macOS Catalina 10.15: Ozmosis.efi Includes all Patches from Gist and 2.2 is altered the way you suggested, also DePex. Here's the ffs: OzmosisCompress.ffs It is called XMAX but can be differentiated from other XMAX variants by the ReleaseDate: 2019-07-01 which appears right next to the Name in the Log and Binary. Doublechecked KernextPatcher, here are my files for current Catalina: KernextPatcher.ffs KernextPatcher.plist Here are all AptioFixes, also in FFS Version with GUID according to the Drv.inf files: AptioMemoryFix R26.zip, OsxAptioFix2Drv.zip, OsxAptioFixDrv.zip You have to use an AptioFix with this patched Ozmosis! An Updated Defaults.plist for macOS Catalina (iMac 14,2): Defaults.plist, OzmosisDefaultsCompress.ffs And ApfsDriverLoader as well as HFSPlus in their newest version: ApfsDriverLoader.Rev-2.0.7Compress.ffs, HFSPlusCompress.ffs I recommend using DevProp or an alternative way of DeviceProperty-Injection, more information here: https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/291655-ozmosis/?do=findComment&comment=2664189 And some more files can be found here: Ozmosis macOS Catalina OZ167-XMAX extended
  4. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    Thanks for testing! So only when you leave out the Patch that deactivates the internal DevProp, Ozmosis will load? Does the HD4600 work in this case? What exactly do you mean by it doesn't load? Does it work when you only use Patch 1.1 and not 1.2? Edit: Sorry, didn't read the latest post. Looks like a typo with 2.2 in @cecekpawon's gist, good catch!
  5. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    @uglyJoe Have you tried debugging the issues with AptioMemoryFix? I agree that different Patch-Levels should be differentiated by different namens but there's Version Number and Date as well, which we might use to differentiate. I was just confused when I suddenly saw version HD46 in Logs or Bins because I had never heard about it before, we should just agree on something because otherwise there's gonna be a lot of different Ozmosis versions floating around soon and nobody will be able to differentiate The OZ EFI I posted also contains the second DevProp Patch, but apart from that they are equal. Now with OpenCore as Ozmosis successor I think we should stop providing Ozmosis for beginners but instead try to generate a DataBase of information for people that are interested, want to patch around, learn or have fun. This can be this thread or if you guys have some good suggestions, go ahead and comment my idea!
  6. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    Great job guys, thanks for the effort! @cecekpawon Did it fail to hook ExitBootServices or was it a problem with detecting the BooterOS Version? @uglyJoe What about AptioMemoryFix, have you tried it? I was wondering, why you renamed the Ozmosis Version with your ROM... Nothing bad about it but I think we should work together to avoid confusion. XMAX is named that way as a word-play, a way to get the maximum out of Ozmosis by extending it with ceceks drivers. I would suggest to keep it that way and just implement the patches from ceceks gist. That would look like the file in the attachment, which should only be used with KernextPatcher, a DeviceProperty Alternative, a dedicated AptioFix and all other Modules of current Catalina/Mojave Ozmosis-ROMs: Edit: Fixed file: Ozmosis.efi Btw: I had a look at Ozmosis DePex Section, I am pretty sure we could extend it if there is the need for that, the structure is very simple. GUIDs from DXE Modules (like CORE_DXE) (byte swaps!) separated by hex values: 02=PUSH 03=AND 08=END What do you guys think, do we need to alter it? @卡几点上课 For testing purposes only: KernextPatcher.ffs
  7. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    You will not be able to Boot Catalina without altering the Kext-Injection Patch in KernextPatcher. You can find everything that's needed here: Otherwise I will provide the files necessary for Catalina in about one week.
  8. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    Would somebody please be so nice and write the new macOS 10.15 Catalina KernelPatches (KBEMojaCata...EXT, KBECata...SIP, KBECata...KxldUnmap) into the KernextPatcher for Ozmosis And provide KernextPatcher.plist and FFS here for people to test. Please don't forget to rename the Patches properly (according to the existing Patches) and to clean up the Plist before injecting it into KernextPatcher.ffs
  9. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    @uglyJoe First of all thanks for your effort in this thread in the last period of time! 10.14.4 patches can be found here as well: Have you analysed the effect of KxldUnmap on Ozmosis? Does a race condition appear in the mentioned case without the use of the patch? The missing DXE Dependency section was not really intended. XMAX was released as a beta only and during testing no problems appeared when DXE Dep was missing (which doesnt really justify leaving it out though). After the Beta-Release I did some tests with readded DXE Dep as well (also regarding HD4600) but couldn't detect any advantage so I decided it was not worth updating all the ROMs again because of that. IMHO with the recent updates on HD4600 and all the drivers now commonly used in XMAX roms etc. DXE Depex should be rewritten (if even possible, probably no without source/inf and dsc) to ensure Ozmosis is loading at the intended time, I don't know if that is possible though, you are free to look into that if you want to
  10. TypeThree

    New OS X compatible motherboard -> QUO

    Sounds good I meant the latests post in general, they might concern the HD4600 but they are also about general topics like AF in Oz and DeviceProperty-Injection...
  11. TypeThree

    New OS X compatible motherboard -> QUO

    Nice Job! Is this based on Ozmosis XMAX or on XMAS? You may want to take a look at the latest posts over at the Ozmosis topic regarding HD4600 patches
  12. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    The Log looks good, thanks for your testing!
  13. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    Thank for your feedback! Did you try to use this Plist for Kext-Injection with 10.14.4? https://www.hackintosh-forum.de/forum/thread/37862-macos-mojave-ozmosis-beta-oz167x-xmax/?postID=484508#post484508
  14. TypeThree

    New OS X compatible motherboard -> QUO

    You can try this new Kernel-Patch: https://www.hackintosh-forum.de/forum/thread/37862-macos-mojave-ozmosis-beta-oz167x-xmax/?postID=484508#post484508
  15. TypeThree

    Ozmosis

    I can't guarantee anything yet. As previously mentioned it can help to use a normal AptioFix and disable Ozm internal AptioFix by using -norelocate flag in some cases.
×