Re: Upgrading to Lion
Is it true that you have to have SL to do the upgrade? No, it is NOT true. And NO, it is NOT an upgrade, it it actually an installer onto 10.6.8, and it can be made into a true installer, and ... indeed ... an installer which needs no other OS of any kind in order to install Lion onto a target generic PC. I didn't see this as a requirement on Apple's site though they only have instructions for upgrading from SL, no other OS is mentioned. Somehow I missed that tidbit in the hoopla. There is a USB flash drive installation technique which works on many Hackintoshes (which I will euphemistically call Macks). I don't know about true Macs, however. I have NO true Macs, except G4 Macs, and Lion WILL NOT install nor run on a G4. The USB flash drive installation method for Macks runs under MacOS X (certainly Snow Leopard, although the scripts probably work equally well on earlier MacOS X versions, too, although I have not tested them). This installation method takes the downloaded application, Install Mac OS X Lion, as is downloaded from the Apple site, rips it apart and thereafter creates a bootable USB flash drive which can install Lion on many, if not most generic PCs. Sure, there are some gotchas, as the installation method strongly implies that the target PC be an Intel P35-based (i.e., 3-series) generic PC, but it has worked perfectly on my P55-based (i.e., 5-series) generic PC, although it has not yet work on my P67-based (i.e., 6-series) generic PC (a kernel panic which is presently being researched), and I would assume it would also work on a P45-based (i.e., 4-series) generic PC. I have been running Lion exclusively, on an almost 24/7 basis for nearly a month, and Server Lion for certainly more than a week or so, and with zero errors of any kind. Everything I have tested has worked, and has worked well. VERY well indeed. I have NEVER been forced to return to 10.6.8, except for correcting certain backup situations, and even those were completely optional on my part. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
On Aug 4, 2011, at 10:30 AM, diane wrote: s it true that you have to have SL to do the upgrade? I didn't see this as a requirement on Apple's site though they only have instructions for upgrading from SL, no other OS is mentioned. Somehow I missed that tidbit in the hoopla. Yes and no. As Peter indicates, it's an installer that can be used on more than one computer. Apple's made the separate installer .dmg available to corporate and educational customers, but for consumers (at least until the $79 USB installer comes out later this month) the only way to get it is via the App Store, which requires 10.6.8 or better. -- Bruce Johnson Wherever you go, there you are B. Banzai, PhD -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
On 8/4/11 1:55 PM, peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: Is it true that you have to have SL to do the upgrade? No, it is NOT true. And NO, it is NOT an upgrade, it it actually an installer onto 10.6.8, and it can be made into a true installer, and ... indeed ... an installer which needs no other OS of any kind in order to install Lion onto a target generic PC. I didn't see this as a requirement on Apple's site though they only have instructions for upgrading from SL, no other OS is mentioned. Somehow I missed that tidbit in the hoopla. There is a USB flash drive installation technique which works on many Hackintoshes (which I will euphemistically call Macks). I don't know about true Macs, however. I have NO true Macs, except G4 Macs, and Lion WILL NOT install nor run on a G4. The USB flash drive installation method for Macks runs under MacOS X (certainly Snow Leopard, although the scripts probably work equally well on earlier MacOS X versions, too, although I have not tested them). This installation method takes the downloaded application, Install Mac OS X Lion, as is downloaded from the Apple site, rips it apart and thereafter creates a bootable USB flash drive which can install Lion on many, if not most generic PCs. Sure, there are some gotchas, as the installation method strongly implies that the target PC be an Intel P35-based (i.e., 3-series) generic PC, but it has worked perfectly on my P55-based (i.e., 5-series) generic PC, although it has not yet work on my P67-based (i.e., 6-series) generic PC (a kernel panic which is presently being researched), and I would assume it would also work on a P45-based (i.e., 4-series) generic PC. I have been running Lion exclusively, on an almost 24/7 basis for nearly a month, and Server Lion for certainly more than a week or so, and with zero errors of any kind. Everything I have tested has worked, and has worked well. VERY well indeed. I have NEVER been forced to return to 10.6.8, except for correcting certain backup situations, and even those were completely optional on my part. These guys have instructions for making USB DVD installers http://www.informationweek.com/byte/ Are these other processors you mention what would be in an old MacBook Pro? -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
On Aug 4, 2011, at 11:20 AM, Mark wrote: Are these other processors you mention what would be in an old MacBook Pro? No they're specific Intel chipsets on generic PeeCees. Lion requires a Core 2 Duo processor or better, excluding the first gen MBP's with their core Duo cpus, which are 32-bit only. Lion is strictly 64 bit.. -- Bruce Johnson Wherever you go, there you are B. Banzai, PhD -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
Are these other processors you mention what would be in an old MacBook Pro? No they're specific Intel chipsets on generic PeeCees. Lion requires a Core 2 Duo processor or better, excluding the first gen MBP's with their core Duo cpus, which are 32-bit only. Lion is strictly 64 bit.. Until the 11.0.0 kernel is released to the Open Source community, and an 11.0.0 Legacy kernel has been released, Lion will be restricted to a specified subset of C2D or better processors. I HAVE been able to make Lion run on my Core 2 Quad 9550 Shuttle SP35 (a Core 2 Quad is NOT the Quad-Core Xeon which Lion expects, but that is a whole 'nother matter), and it is running quite well, and has been running quite well for nearly a month on my i5-760 Core i5 processor in my ASRock P55 Pro motherboard generic PC. I run Lion in 64-bit mode, although the Finder is required to run in 64-bit mode. I have also run the kernel in 32-bit mode, although the Finder ALWAYS runs in 64-bit mode. This is NOT an inconsistency as you may BOOT Lion in 32-bit mode (boot flags arch=i386), but as long as the processor actually supports 64-bit mode, as the Q9550 certainly does, all of Lion will run quite well, including the Finder. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Tina K. wrote: Meaning the OS is 100% 64 bit, or the OS and Apps are 100% 64 bit? I don't think so, but I'm still confused upon this issue? Would someone clarify please? I'd thought that Lion was supposed to be 100% 64-bit, and since my hackintosh laptop (as well as many real Mac models) uses the Intel X3100 graphics chipset, and the X3100 is 32-bit only, I thought this meant no Lion for the X3100. If you boot normally (64-bit) the X3100 is indeed without any acceleration and works poorly, but if you add the kernel boot flag to for 32-bit operation then the 32-bit X3100 kexts load and you get full acceleration. When booted 64-bit kextstat shows 84 kexts loaded, but when booted with the 32-bit flag there were 99 kexts loaded, so 15 more kexts under 32-bit. Obviously there is still 32-bit operation under Lion, but perhaps many of the apps don't run as 32-bit? As I said, I'm new to Lion and confused about this issue also. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
Lion is strictly 64 bit.. Meaning the OS is 100% 64 bit, or the OS and Apps are 100% 64 bit? Lion is intended to be 64-bit, but only the Finder MUST run in 64-bit. The kernel is 32-/64-bit as is almost everything else (except the Finder). You may boot Lion into 32-bit (arch=i386, in the boot loader's boot flags), but the processor MUST support 64-bit because the Finder expects and requires a 64-bit processor even if almost everything else doesn't. There remains a number of device support modules which are 32-bit because the associated physical hardware is only 32-bit. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
At 8:13 PM -0500 8/4/2011, Kris Tilford wrote: On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Tina K. wrote: Meaning the OS is 100% 64 bit, or the OS and Apps are 100% 64 bit? I don't think so, but I'm still confused upon this issue? Would someone clarify please? [Moved from below for clarity] When booted 64-bit kextstat shows 84 kexts loaded, but when booted with the 32-bit flag there were 99 kexts loaded, so 15 more kexts under 32-bit. Obviously there is still 32-bit operation under Lion, but perhaps many of the apps don't run as 32-bit? The bit width of the kernel has *nothing* to do with the width of the frameworks or apps. Those are separate layers, that are managed, well, separately! OS X can run 32 or 64 bit frameworks and apps, regardless of which kernel is booted. Like Snow Leopard, Lion contains no ppc code. It is x86 only. Like Snow Leopard, Lion contains both a 32-bit and a 64-bit kernel. If you have any 32-bit kernel extensions, then Lion has to boot in 32-bit mode. As distributed, there's a file missing that tells Lion it can boot on 32-bit hardware -- hence Apple's claim that you need a Core 2 or better processor. Add that file back and it works... this was discovered by the hackintosh crowd during the seeding cycle. I'd thought that Lion was supposed to be 100% 64-bit Nothing is pure 64-bit yet. That's not going to happen until ALL of Apple's stuff AND the 3rd party drivers (kernel extensions) are either updated or blown off. And then there's all the frameworks and apps. ... Part of this transition is that Apple is moving away from the old Carbon API to the native Cocoa / Objective-C system. It's only just now that they rewrote iTunes to conform! At the app level, consider QuickTime - Apple's own puppy. QuickTime X is 64-bit Cocoa, but is missing quite a few codecs, as well as support for things like QTVR, interactive QT movies, and MIDI. To do any of those missing things, QTKit spawns off a helper process that runs QuickTime 7, in 32-bit mode Nice kludge, eh? HTH, - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:00 PM, peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: Lion is intended to be 64-bit, but only the Finder MUST run in 64- bit. The kernel is 32-/64-bit as is almost everything else (except the Finder). You may boot Lion into 32-bit (arch=i386, in the boot loader's boot flags), but the processor MUST support 64-bit because the Finder expects and requires a 64-bit processor even if almost everything else doesn't. Has anyone seen the Finder using even 1 GB of virtual memory, let alone exceeding the 4 GB limit that necessitates 64-bit pointers? Josh -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
At 10:12 PM -0400 8/4/2011, Dan wrote: As distributed, there's a file missing that tells Lion it can boot on 32-bit hardware -- hence Apple's claim that you need a Core 2 or better processor. Add that file back and it works... this was discovered by the hackintosh crowd during the seeding cycle. Just to clarify - it's a bit more complicated than the above; google around for details. And the new Finder is a Cocoa 64-bit only build, so it won't run on 32-bit hardware. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
At 7:38 PM -0700 8/4/2011, Joshua Juran wrote: Has anyone seen the Finder using even 1 GB of virtual memory, let alone exceeding the 4 GB limit that necessitates 64-bit pointers? No. Nothing I've tried makes it suck up anything near that much. I think my peak so far is around 420 MB. And that took a lot of externals and a lot of windows Re-writing Finder was about getting rid of the Carbon bits, and making it pure Cocoa, IMO. The 64bit-ness was just a bonus. If you think about it, that makes sense. The evolution of OS X is toward pure 64-bit Cocoa. Now that Apple has dumped Rosetta, there is no reason to keep the transition API for much longer -- Carbon is doomed. Soon. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Upgrading to Lion
On 11-08-04 1:30 PM, diane dianed...@gmail.com wrote: Is it true that you have to have SL to do the upgrade? I didn't see this as a requirement on Apple's site though they only have instructions for upgrading from SL, no other OS is mentioned. Somehow I missed that tidbit in the hoopla. Thanks, Diane There are articles out there that will explain in detail how to create a USB or DVD version of the Lion installer so you can do a clean install. I actually made an installer using a small partition of my 2TB drive and did a clean install on a much larger partition. The actual installer is buried in the contents package and it is a .dmg file. The articles will explain everything. Installation of Lion went much faster using the hard drive than when using DVD. BTW the articles do warn that booting the installer from DVD does take awhile so be patient. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
