Jump to content
1709 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, D-an-W said:

Just adding revpatch=sbvmm to my boot args got me the update as I already had the kext in there, thanks everyone for the information!

 

Will it affect my Ventura install or ok to leave it in there?

 

Well, it does the same which is: reporting macOS as running in a VM (which has a speciall board-id) and then the update will work in situations, where it usually doesn't like using a T2 SMBIOS with SecureBootModel set to Disabled and/or SIP disabled. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
1 hour ago, D3v1L said:

uhm strange things... revpatch=sbvmm simply activate update on unsupported Mac model...but... I'm on MacPro7,1 ...so basically 2019 MacPro and, like Apple site say, supported Mac...and didn't show the update ahahahah LoL (only full package) I really love Hackintosh xD btw, I think this time is related to T2... 'couse only imac19 works OOB..and he didn't have t2 chip...so...

 

My hack uses SMBIOS MacMini8,1 (2018) which has a T2 chip.  RestrictEvents.kext / sbvmm worked for me (update used the incremental installer, not the full installer).  Is it possible that you have other kernel patches (similar to OCLP) that force a full installer?

Edited by deeveedee

Hello to all 😝 

@miliuco

RestrictEvents It is almost ready to work without bootarg to do incremental updates 😉

Thanks @PMheart @dhinakg

Edited by lorys89
  • Like 6

@lorys89 @PMheart @dhinakg

 

Thank you all!!!

I have followed the evolution of the fork of RestrictEvents that you did on your GitHub and the swupd-test branch in the Acidanthera repo, excellent work, now it will be easier to fix this issue, just have RestrictEvents up-to-date and enable it to get updates on Sonoma.

 

 

Edited by miliuco
  • Like 2
3 hours ago, deeveedee said:

 

EDIT: For me, Big Sur, Monterey, Ventura and Sonoma all boot / run fine with the same EFI (including RestrictEvents.kext and revpatch=sbvmm).

With the same system serial number? I used to do the same with Monterey/Ventura , but everytime I changed os, it showed problem with the icloud sync.

I doubt my testing branch of RestrictEvents will bring any extra benefits other than enabling the sbvmm patch by default. As @lorys89 pointed out, sbvmm patch conflicts with memtab and pciui patches, thus more investigation will be required. As for the new patch, so far we have seen nothing positive. <- just the truth.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

This Sonoma is very beauty but have many issues.

 

Im need use many programs that not run on Sonoma beta 3, or 2, or 1.

 

Most important for my Work (Job). Especially digital signature. 

 

:thumbsdown_anim: 

@Max.1974 It's early, so you have plenty of time.  For me, I won't be using Sonoma as my "production" macOS until March or April of 2024.  I don't upgrade my production volume to the new macOS until it is required for an XCode upgrade.  For now, Sonoma is just a toy to have fun with.  I still use Montery quite a bit (and even Big Sur for some work).

Edited by deeveedee
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
37 minutos atrás, deeveedee disse:

@Max.1974É cedo, então você tem muito tempo. Para mim, não usarei o Sonoma como meu macOS de "produção" até março ou abril de 2024. Eu não atualizo meu volume de produção para o novo macOS até que seja necessário para uma atualização do XCode. Por enquanto, Sonoma é apenas um brinquedo para se divertir. Eu ainda uso bastante Montery (e até Big Sur para algum trabalho).

 

Thanks my friend, certainly not fully released yet, but we, as Hackinotshers, are waiting for the updates to come as soon as possible. I try to use the previous one, Ventura, which runs everything, but Sonoma causes a bit of astonishment until we manage to "run" everything smooth. I've seen that software developers are pretty slow when it comes to new parameters. My token and NTFS Paragon were already running in the early days of Ventura Beta. This sonoma is "threaded" as we say here in Brazil. 

  • Like 1
7 hours ago, deeveedee said:

 

My hack uses SMBIOS MacMini8,1 (2018) which has a T2 chip.  RestrictEvents.kext / sbvmm worked for me (update used the incremental installer, not the full installer).  Is it possible that you have other kernel patches (similar to OCLP) that force a full installer?

 

RestrictEvents with sbvmm is working for all...'couse it fake a virtual machine...I don't use RestrictEvents in my rig (z390)...and no kernel patches at all ...i've only 4 kext (Lilu VirtualSMC IntelMausi and usbmap) and one ssdt lol 😅 btw i think is all related to t2 this time...t2 smbios don't receive incremental if system update don't find the chip...(i think...)

Edited by D3v1L
typo
  • Like 2

@D3v1L

Yes, it’s a logical option. You say "t2 smbios don't receive incremental if system update don't find the chip... (i think)" and it can explain the issue that many users have not getting incremental updates when having SMBIOS of T2 models. 
But then you have also the issue setting MacPro7,1 without RestrictEvents, right?

12 minutes ago, miliuco said:

@D3v1L

Yes, it’s a logical option. You say "t2 smbios don't receive incremental if system update don't find the chip... (i think)" and it can explain the issue that many users have not getting incremental updates when having SMBIOS of T2 models. 
But then you have also the issue setting MacPro7,1 without RestrictEvents, right?

Absolutely yes. MP7.1 have t2 also...so is 4 this that i think the incremental is chip related.. 😅 ...btw, like you, same launchpad issue here..

Edited by D3v1L
  • Like 1

Of course, if the seal is broken, no amount of vmm spoofing will prevent ota from trying to update with the full installer.

Edited by deeveedee
20 minutes ago, PMheart said:

For those using MacPro7,1 SMBios, what kind of issue do you get when using RestrictEvents pciui, memtab, and sbvmm patches?

For me, no issue at all...i never using RestrictEvents 🤣

  • Like 1

Not sure where to ask this, so I apologize for the off-topic (but related) question.  Which revpatch value controls RestrictEvents.kext's EFI Check disable? It appears to me that RestrictEvents.kext always disables EFI Check despite any revpatch values.

 

EDIT: Unless I missed it, there is no mention of EFI Check in the RestrictEvents readme.

 

EDIT2: For those who want more info about EFI Check, see here.  For some, disabling EFI Check may be a reason to add RestrictEvents.kext (or EFICheckDisabler.kext) even if you don't need RestrictEvents.kext for VMM spoofing.

 

EDIT3: I looked at RestrictEvents.kext Info.plist.  I'm not a kext expert, but it looks to me as though EFICheckDisabler is incorporated into RestrictEvents.kext as a "codeless" patch, so it's possible that there is no way to control EFI Check with nvram properties.

 

Spoiler

816309410_Screenshot2023-07-07at1_01_15PM.png.0e52a5e2d2a426f4bea3a4b1f042decd.png

 

Edited by deeveedee

Updated my hack macOS SoNoWifi, and all is well, but I don't have incremental updates because my SMBios is iMac 20,2 ...

Versão 14.0 beta (23A5286g)

Edited by MorenoAv
  • Like 4
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...