> On 30 Mar 2021, at 12:44 am, use-livecode-requ...@lists.runrev.com wrote:
> Unfortunately this has never been true on macOS X.
> The Resources folder (which is in the macOS app bundle) should be 
> treated as read-only…

Mark Waddingham chides me for saying it is OK to write to the Resources folder 
in the app bundle on a Mac. Mark is, as ever absolutely correct. The correct 
place for application support files is the Library/Applications Support folder, 
and this has been the AppleGuideline for a very long time (although I am not 
quite so sure about that *always* being the case..) I was wrong, naughty, and I 
promise… Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. I strongly advise against this awful 
filthy and degrading practice.

Except m’lud (he said in a very small voice), may I offer some admittedly 
post-hoc and flimsy excuses.

1. The app in which I do this originates from the days before the Application 
Support folder existed (I am pretty sure) and has grown like Topsy ever since. 
It worked then, it still works now. With one big caveat: this is ad hoc 
software, distributed to a small group of users (Colin: by all the usual 
methods - server, email, DropBox… they all work to deliver a working app 
without my having to renew my lapsed Apple Developer registration.) If I were 
to commercialise the app and so notarise it, I would expect writing to the 
Resources folder *not* to work, probably notarising keeps a checksum of the 
whole app bundle not just the executable. Maybe this distinction between ad hoc 
and notarised software is part of the confusion of this very confused thread, 
to which I have regrettably added more confusion.

2. It is a great convenience to my Mac users to be able to move their copy of 
the app to another machine, or give it to a friend, without having to worry 
about finding and transferring auxiliary files (unlike my linux users, who I 
must advise to keep everything together in one directory).

3. There is no need for Installer code, or more problematic, and with a whiff 
of sulphur to sensitive old-hand Mac user noses, an Uninstaller. Again if I 
were to commercialise the app, these would come with the territory of license 
files etc.

4. If my user wants to get at the auxiliary files, it is easy enough to explain 
the arcane process of opening up the Contents of the bundle. Explaining how to 
access the Library is only slightly more arcane, but I really don’t want the 
uninitiated venturing into that dark scary and very dangerous place .

So, readers, don’t do it. But keep it to yourself if you do. And it probably 
won’t work in MacOS 17.6.

Finally on the problem of opening unsafe/unnotarised apps in recent MacOS, I am 
afraid the discussion here has clearly only increased the confusion of the 
original forum user. Surely best to refer to the definitive source, the Apple 
Support documents which you can get by googling “How to open an unsafe app in 
Big Sur” (or Catalina, or Mojave). The instructions from Apple are clear and 
straightforward, unlike some tech forums which start off by talking about using 
the terminal to turn off Gatekeeper. 


use-livecode mailing list
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 

Reply via email to