Great, so normal updates won't be an issue with the vmware method.
Thanks for the confirmation.
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.
MP 1,1-5,1 Obsolete, Use OpenCore instead | What you need to do to make Catalina work with MacPro5,1
- Thread starter tsialex
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
- Status
Thanks for the confirmation.
Yes, you just run your Catalina disk as a direct hardware VM and do the update. Since it's running as a VM again, the board-id validation is bypassed and the updates installed.
I'm curious about something: When running as a VM, are the system properties (like board-id, model identifier, serial number, UUID, etc.) changed? If so, does this pose a problem for Messages (a problem that would eventually lead to blacklisting the unvirtualized system)?
You only runs your main disk as a VM with direct hardware trick, to install or upgrade. The distribution file checks for the VMM processor flag and bypass the board-id check, doing the install/upgrade.
When you running it as bare metal, nothing changes.
BTW, there are ways to send the SSN and board-ID to the VM, so iMessage works even when you are upgrading. I don't think that we will need it, but it's something that you can do and you can always log-off iMessage before doing the upgrade.
Can anyone comment on the advisability or feasibility of changing one or more property lists (plist) on the Catalina installer so that it will install without resorting to NVRAM arguments? Or, perhaps more conveniently, would changing one or more plist's in the installed Catalina itself allow it to run on a Mac Pro 5,1 without compatibility NVRAM arguments? Might that, in addition, solve the Software Update issue?
Something I found interesting. Parallels 15, which now has Metal support, asked if I wanted to update to Catalina. Update ran without a hitch. This is my Mac Pro 4,1 that's updated to run Mojave. It natively can't be updated in this way, but Parallels made the installer think it's fine. Screenshot of Software Update and System Info within the VM
Attachments
Does the Catalina Loader script allows to update the Mojave system on my current AFPS disk? Or I have to use a new drive to install it?
one interesting thing I noticed on my MacBook Pro is that it now says "Quad Core intel Core i7" in about this Mac rather than "Core i7" previously, I imagine this might be something to do with the fact that "Core i7" could mean to be a CPU with 2 all the way to 8 cores now
and on that im curious what the iMac Pro says in catalina
since they for some reason just say "Xeon W" which I found odd at the time, as previous Xeon CPUs would list their core count in about this mac, so I wonder if the about this mac description has been updated accordingly with catalina
(and it will be interesting to see what the new Mac Pro says in about this mac
)
and on that im curious what the iMac Pro says in catalina
since they for some reason just say "Xeon W" which I found odd at the time, as previous Xeon CPUs would list their core count in about this mac, so I wonder if the about this mac description has been updated accordingly with catalina
(and it will be interesting to see what the new Mac Pro says in about this mac
)
It's not possible since the installer checks the signatures and rejects it. What you want is a patched system like dosdude1 one.
The board-id is defined by hardware and checked with every distribution file inside every update.
Seems you didn't understand why this thread exists, it's to use a totally un-patched Catalina install with MP5,1. If you want to patch it and live with the problems of a patched system, just use dosdude1 patcher, no need to re-invent it.
I fail to see how you can claim that it "seems" I don't understand why this thread exists. I understand perfectly, and I know what dosdude1's patcher does. I may use that, but I simply would prefer not to have a NVRAM with debugging arguments. I was asking for a comment on the advisability or feasibility of not using that. You've now made the relevant comment, and I thank you for that.
Can you clarify the use of a physical Catalina on a virtual machine so that Software Update will work? How would such a virtual machine run? Using Fusion running in Mojave?
If you don't want to use -no_compat_check, you will have to use a totally patched macOS install like dosdude1 patcher that disables every check and validation that Apple implemented and will stop working at every point update since updates re-enables the checks and validations. Or you can get your hands dirty and install Catalina manually, package by package disabling the checks/validations yourself, I know at least one developer that does this way.
I explained in detail the mechanics of the updates while running in a VM, please go back a page or two.
You run your Catalina disk as a VM using the VMWare Fusion direct hardware trick that I explained in the beginning of the thread, begins with post #107.
In addition to this being a Virtual Machine (which is known to work), Parallels doesn't provide Metal to macOS guests. It will only run DirectX under Windows. You can tell in that screenshot that macOS is not being Metal accelerated in that VM.
Catalina does not require Metal under a VM though.
Can I backup my boot drive with Mojave on it using super duper to an external USB drive, perform the update to Catalina on the external USB drive connected to my 2018 MacBook Pro and then use super duper to clone it back to the NVME boot drive in my Mac Pro 5,1?
My Boot Drive with the OS is on a separate NVME than my Data Drive. With that in mind I backup the drives every week using Super Duper.
My Boot Drive with the OS is on a separate NVME than my Data Drive. With that in mind I backup the drives every week using Super Duper.
It will probably work fine.
The thing is, do you really want to exchange the stability of 10.14.6 for 10.15.0? Catalina is not ready for prime time…
Someone had or reported some issues with the DP/beta and doing this, but I really think it was an issue with the clone. Carbon Copy Cloner (CCC) semi-recently updated to support Catalina features and believe corrected for this.
Correct... There were some MAJOR issues related to the way Catalina implements APFS directory structures, and this resulted in a non-bootable clone(attempt). It has been a work in progress on CCC and I don't believe it works in SuperDuper. I haven't tried it as I have no need to, but there are lots of little things that need to be worked out before ditching any macOS in favor of Catalina.
Running Mojave. Thought it might be more shocking since Catalina won't install without lots of fiddling (as covered elsewhere in the thread) but the installer was still ok with the VM's semi-native hardware and virtualized hardware lies, thinking "Yeah, this is compatible".
I hadn't realized this was the case, tho I should have suspected, since I did notice there was no mention of Metal support in the VM's system information (ergo none). So if Catalina's fine running without Metal in a VM, does Apple consider it kosher to run Catalina in this way, and only in a VM context? As cool as it is frustrating...
The thing is, do you really want to exchange the stability of 10.14.6 for 10.15.0? Catalina is not ready for prime time…
[/QUOTE]
I do not run X.0 of anything. No I do not want to move to Catalina right now. The question is more about learning how this works before I need it. I just moved to Mojave 10.14.5 right after it came out.
[/QUOTE]
I do not run X.0 of anything. No I do not want to move to Catalina right now. The question is more about learning how this works before I need it. I just moved to Mojave 10.14.5 right after it came out.
For anyone reading this thread later and looking for more info, see this post from Bombich Software (maker of CCC):
And the latest CCC 5 release notes with bugs they've worked on (including huge list of Catalina "stuff"):
AFAIK that is currently (at least part of) the subject of a lawsuit against Corellium for iOS. As long as VMware/Parallels is not distributing the OS or modifying in an illegal way, or charging for OS access, for personal use it might legally be considered OK, for now. Depending where that lawsuit goes, it may pave the way for future litigation...
Installed Catalina release on an external drive on supported Mac (2019 MBP)
Read post #1, and used Recovery to set nvram boot args -no_compat_check..and moved the SSD to my MacPro4,1 (flashed to 5,1) and it works just fine......though Cinebench r20 won't run correctly
Read post #1, and used Recovery to set nvram boot args -no_compat_check..and moved the SSD to my MacPro4,1 (flashed to 5,1) and it works just fine......though Cinebench r20 won't run correctly
For anyone reading this thread later and looking for more info, see this post from Bombich Software (maker of CCC):
And the latest CCC 5 release notes with bugs they've worked on (including huge list of Catalina "stuff"):
Yeah, Mike sent me a detailed email about it sometime back but it was not really relevant for me at the time so I only skimmed over it. The gist I got was it's unreliable and evolving. I'm running the latest beta and it's supposed to work, but I haven't really tested it. I'm not hitching my wagon to Catalina for a long time. It presents too many issues for me at present. I'll drive it around for a week or two and delete it.
I'll consider it more fully after a few point releases.
I can't boot into Recovery Mode to do it this way, and can't get Startup Disk to bless the drive I want to boot off of for the Dosdude method. Any other options? (Mojave on 5,1).
- Status