notarization vs MacPorts apps

Joshua Root jmr at
Sat Apr 13 06:47:01 UTC 2019

On 2019-4-13 07:57 , Jack Howarth wrote:
>      What will be the situation with 10.14.5 and its enforcement of
> notarization for Applications and kernel extensions for MacPorts? In
> particular, will the new notarization requirement limit users to the
> MacPorts build machine copies of such packages which have applications
> rather than being able to build those packages locally?
>         Jack

The MacPorts installer pkg will need to be submitted, but I don't think
much else will change. Using MacPorts-built kernel extensions is already
impossible because of signing requirements (we don't have a kext signing
certificate and I don't think we qualify for one.)

For general apps, Gatekeeper doesn't prevent running locally built ones
due to them being unsigned, and I gather than notarization is only
required in the same circumstances as signing. (It would be incredibly
inconvenient for developers to test anything if this were not the case.)

- Josh

More information about the macports-dev mailing list