On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Peter Mulholland<[email protected]> wrote: > If you are referring to me not using NSApplicationMain(), how is that > unsupported? In fact the code is based on things I've seen in Apple samples. > [NSApplication sharedApplication] is a documented API. So is loading your own > NIB. I'm not doing anything illegal there.
I'm referring to your use of NSApplication in an app that's not bundled. You can't do that. Apps must be in app bundles. >> Then perhaps you should be considering a refactor. > > No. Effectively, the code functions like an executable unpacker. In fact, I > got the idea from the source code to the UPX executable packer. There is > nothing wrong with this approach provided the methods are fully understood. You mean aside from the whole idea of non-executable pages? Or do you write the contents out to disk and execute them from there? > Besides, what do you think Launch Services does? Eventually, it calls > vfork()/execve(). It just adds some friendly fluff over the top of it. Well yes, but that's not saying much. This is UNIX, after all. It's a bit like saying "Besides, what do you think Quartz does? Eventually, it shoves data over PCI-Express. It just adds some friendly fluff over the top of it." >> You don't know what Apple has in store for code signing requirements >> on post-Leopard operating systems. It is known that code signing >> requirements will be stricter in the future than they are now. How >> and when is still unknown, but trying to decrypt and execute an >> application like this might result in irking the security gods. > > Since when do apps running on OS X *have* to be code signed? They don't, currently. Apple has not said anything beyond "we'll be using this more in the future than we are right now." > IF Apple start requiring ALL apps to be code signed (and presumably, charge > for the privilege), watch as support from smaller developers disappears. Even > MS aren't going to do that. I doubt that. Code signing is easy for anyone to do. Every single iPhone app is code signed, for example. > This is exactly the kind of attitude that means game dev does *not* happen on > OS X. I highly doubt that. I would imagine the fact that the Mac doesn't run DirectX or expose a Win32 API has a lot to with that. > We reserve the right to attempt to protect our investment and hard work! More > to the point, we do a lot of porting work, and it is a requirement of the > original publisher/developer that we protect the port as much as possible. There's a rather large OT argument to be had here. For Scott's sake, I'm going to avoid it. > The aim is not to prevent cracking - that will happen. The aim is to make it > as difficult as possible, and delay it so that our product has a chance to > sell. Also, it means we can make thinks awkward for those people using > cracked copies. Fair enough. But these kinds of copy protection schemes are always fraught with peril. --Kyle Sluder _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
