unsigned kexts on Yosemite

Landon J Fuller landonf at macports.org
Fri Oct 24 19:11:13 PDT 2014

On Oct 24, 2014, at 8:00 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:

>> I agree that a kext requires a higher degree of trust, I just don’t think a single-vendor signing regime is a net win for users.
> But that's what Apple's policy in Yosemite seems to be, and it has typically been MacPorts strategy to attempt to adopt whatever policy changes Apple makes as best we can.

Historically, Apple’s technological/commercial interests have been more aligned with the requirements of MacPorts’ user base, and even then, MacPorts has shipped things that Apple no longer supported because those tools were still required by MacPorts' users.

If someone wants to exercise their prerogative to install an unsigned kext, Apple has already added plenty of barriers. I don’t see what we have to gain by deleting the ports out from under them, too.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20141024/78994731/attachment.sig>

More information about the macports-dev mailing list