Login  •  Register


The time is now: Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:12 pm

Emaculation wiki  •  Delete all board cookies



Post new topic  Reply to topic Page 1 of 2 [ 35 posts ]    Go to page 1, 2  Next
Print view Previous topic  |  Next topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:51 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
Can anyone clarify whether this means that we can continue to run SheepShaver in 32-bit mode?

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/06/06/ap ... -mac-apps/

Or does it simply mean that apps that can run ONLY in 32-bit mode will cause problems?


Last edited by emendelson on Wed Jun 07, 2017 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:14 pm 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 4836
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
In iOS 10 you will see a warning when running 32-bit apps In iOS 11 32-bit apps will not run anymore.

As I understand it, macOS 10.13 (High Sierra) will be the last macOS version that will fully support 32-bit apps.
Quote:
In the "Platform State of the Union" session shortly after the main keynote, Apple said that it would "aggressively" warn users about 32-bit apps in the macOS version after High Sierra. Additionally, High Sierra would be the last version to support 32-bit apps "without compromises."
http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/06/ ... 2-bit-apps


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:20 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
Yes, exactly, but that story (which is basically the same as the story I linked to) doesn't seem to answer the question: What does this mean in practice for SheepShaver? It's a 64-bit app that should run in 32-bit mode. Does anyone know how that will be affected?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:27 pm 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 4836
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Well, you can set SheepShaver to run in 32-bit mode. My latest builds will run in 32-bit mode by default. I suppose that does not change with macOS 10.13. It is not 64-bit app that needs to be run in 32-bit mode, it is both 64-bit and 32-bit, each part compiled separately and then combined.

Edit:
If needed, it is easy to remove the 64-bit part from the SheepShaver executable to make it a 32-bit only app.

Another issue may be the new Apple File System (APFS) that will be the default in macOS 10.13. It could well be that the "Unix" shared folder in SheepShaver and BasiliskII will not work anymore. And I wonder if old Mac files will survive in APFS with resource fork and metadata intact. During macOS 10.13 installation one can choose to keep the HFS+ file system, but will that be possible in later OS versions?


Last edited by Ronald P. Regensburg on Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:28 pm 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 4192
Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
I guess it can be compiled 64 bit, so without the 32bit bound JIT.
Otherwise, prepare for Qemu ;-)

If the Apple File System doesn't honor the old HFS structures, Apple users will be in the same boat as Windows users: use a self-contained file format and extract in the guest. (Indeed assuming the Unix folder feature still works.)

Best,
Cat_7


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:32 pm 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 4836
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
The problem is that 64-bit SheepShaver will not run on latest MacOS versions.


Last edited by Ronald P. Regensburg on Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 5:11 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
Cat_7 wrote:
If the Apple File System doesn't honor the old HFS structures, Apple users will be in the same boat as Windows users: use a self-contained file format and extract in the guest. (Indeed assuming the Unix folder feature still works.)


I can't say anything about the source of my information, but I'm very confident that SheepShaver (at least in the build I made myself a few years ago) will work perfectly under High Sierra on an APFS-formatted disk, and that it will be possible to save to the Unix folder and open files from the Unix folder.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:32 am 
Offline
Tinkerer

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:05 am
Posts: 92
I still haven't been able to get the High Sierra beta to actually boot on my machine (the dev build seems to be interacting badly with my MBP's boot firmware when on an APFS volume), but resource forks and whatnot seemed to work fine when I tested them on Sierra's unstable APFS support, FWIW.

The lack of 32-bit compatibility for the next release after HS will probably spell the end of SheepShaver, though, as I understand that it's never been made to work properly in 64-bit mode. Hopefully by then, QEMU's Mac emulation will have a finished sound implementation so we can just switch to that instead.

_________________
There's no earthly way of knowing, which direction we are going, for the rowers keep on rowing, and they're certainly not showing any signs that they are slowing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 9:28 am 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 4836
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
CharlesS wrote:
as I understand that it's never been made to work properly in 64-bit mode.

SheepShaver 64-bit worked fine in OSX 10.6 through 10.9, but will not launch in 10.10 and later. I am not sure if anyone tried to find the cause.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:05 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
Ronald P. Regensburg wrote:
CharlesS wrote:
as I understand that it's never been made to work properly in 64-bit mode.

SheepShaver 64-bit worked fine in OSX 10.6 through 10.9, but will not launch in 10.10 and later. I am not sure if anyone tried to find the cause.


The 26 July 2013 build that you posted here seems to work in 64-bit mode under Sierra:

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8021

It's the build that I use for my projects.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:44 pm 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 4836
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
emendelson wrote:
The 26 July 2013 build that you posted here seems to work in 64-bit mode under Sierra:

Are you sure it is not set to run in 32-bit mode (the default)? Here that build, like any other build, will not launch in 64-bit mode in Sierra.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 10, 2017 8:54 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
Ronald P. Regensburg wrote:
emendelson wrote:
The 26 July 2013 build that you posted here seems to work in 64-bit mode under Sierra:

Are you sure it is not set to run in 32-bit mode (the default)? Here that build, like any other build, will not launch in 64-bit mode in Sierra.


It certainly seems to be set to 64-bit; for this test, I disabled 32-bit in the plist.info file. Here's a screenshot with details (I replaced the standard icon):

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:38 am 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 4192
Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
if you use Activity Monitor to get info on SheepShaver with your settings and sample the process, you'll see that the code type is X86, while e.g., the finder shows that it's code type is X86_64. Running Qemu also shows X86_64

This seems to suggest that it is running 32 bit nevertheless.

Best,
Cat_7


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:43 am 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:24 pm
Posts: 4836
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Removing the 32-bit (and PPC) architectures from the priority and minimum OS settings in info.plist will not prevent SheepShaver to run in 32-bit mode. If, however, you would reverse the original priority settings, set Intel 64-bit first as item 0, and Intel 32-bit second as item 1, you would see that SheepShaver cannot be launched in Sierra unless it is set to launch in 32-bit mode in Finder Info.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
You are right: it won't start with both entries in the plist.info file.

Let's hope for a faster, file-sharing Qemu!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 2:13 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:47 pm
Posts: 1038
Location: Germany
Seems SheepShaver is safe for another year or so with recent macOS.
A friend just sent me this from his MBP, HFS+ partition.

Image

I know, I´m going to keep my C2D oldie with 10.6.8 for sure. ;)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:09 pm 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 4192
Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
Yes, but does all functionality remain?
I haven't been able to run the executable inside the bundle as root to get tap/appletalk going.

Best,
Cat_7


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:30 am 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
One solution is to run SheepShaver for Windows in a Wineskin wrapper, as shown here. I added a simple bash script to the Wineskin Startup Script that assigned the current user's Documents folder in the host system to drive D: in Wine. As you can see, the OS 9.0.4 Finder doesn't have enough memory to display all the files in the host Documents folder. Is there a solution for that?

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:41 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:11 am
Posts: 1844
When I was using this method, I just used a dedicated folder inside wineskin and symlinked that to an external location, instead of using the active Documents folder. This worked for me.

Looks like I may need to switch my 7.1.2 through 8.6 images back from SheepShaver to BII going forward though, or possibly move the first ones over to Mini vMac II.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:05 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
And Wineskin wrappers run in X86 mode also, so this method presumably won't work either when 32-bit apps stop working altogether...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:48 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:11 am
Posts: 1844
Wineskin wrappers don't have to run in x86 mode; the code is in place in WINE to translate to 64-bit, and the wineskin dev knows enough (and has segmented the code enough) that it should be possible to run it in 64-bit mode. It'll be a bit of work, but I can't see it not happening.

I'll drop him a line and see if he's got a plan in place.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:08 am 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
I believe the developer is "her" not "he." Here's hoping she'll agree!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:21 am 
Offline
Tinkerer

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:05 am
Posts: 92
CodeWeavers makes a lot of money on CrossOver, which is based on WINE. So just based on that, I can't imagine a plan to make WINE 64-bit-compatible isn't already in place.

_________________
There's no earthly way of knowing, which direction we are going, for the rowers keep on rowing, and they're certainly not showing any signs that they are slowing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:53 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:11 am
Posts: 1844
I was assuming the CodeWeavers bit; WineSkin can choose which WINE engine it uses, and CodeWeavers engines are one of the options.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 1:38 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:12 am
Posts: 761
For what it's worth, 64-bit Wineskin engines are available here:

http://portingteam.com/topic/10830-wine64-engines/

The latest one seems to work perfectly with my SheepShaver setup (I'm using the Mac driver option; X11 seems to run in 32-bit only). There are still some 32-bit processes running, but maybe the Wineskin author can fix that...?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote Post a reply  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic Page 1 of 2 [ 35 posts ]    Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
 

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group