Any applications, this includes command line applications, will require to be notarized on the latest version of macOS, Catalina (10.15), which is available as a public beta.

This means that by default DMD and related applications won't run. It's possible to go into System Preference and launch the application anyway, but that's a pretty poor user experience.

I've created an issue for this [1] and directly contacted a couple of core members.

[1] https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20124

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Monday, 12 August 2019 at 12:19:32 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> Any applications, this includes command line applications, will require to be notarized on the latest version of macOS, Catalina (10.15), which is available as a public beta.
>
> This means that by default DMD and related applications won't run. It's possible to go into System Preference and launch the application anyway, but that's a pretty poor user experience.
>
> I've created an issue for this [1] and directly contacted a couple of core members.
>
> [1] https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20124

I think the real bug is that people are still using apple products :)

On Monday, 12 August 2019 at 12:19:32 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> Any applications, this includes command line applications, will require to be notarized on the latest version of macOS, Catalina (10.15), which is available as a public beta.
>
> This means that by default DMD and related applications won't run. It's possible to go into System Preference and launch the application anyway, but that's a pretty poor user experience.
>
> I've created an issue for this [1] and directly contacted a couple of core members.
>
> [1] https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20124

This is very OT.

Changes like this make me remember this story:

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html

I'm not a fan of Stallman and consider his opinions too extreme on several accounts. But every time someone builds general purpose computers that artificially limit what their owners can do, I keep thinking that we're taking yet another step towards a less free future.

On Monday, 12 August 2019 at 16:38:46 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:
>
> This is very OT.
>
> Changes like this make me remember this story:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
>
> I'm not a fan of Stallman and consider his opinions too extreme on several accounts. But every time someone builds general purpose computers that artificially limit what their owners can do, I keep thinking that we're taking yet another step towards a less free future.


It'a not same.

Apple laptop/workstation still can run non-notarized  software. They just warning user this software is not notarized, could be potential do harm to your data or hardware.

It is necessary for non-professional users.

On 13.08.19 02:48, Newbie2019 wrote:
> 
> Apple laptop/workstation still can run non-notarized  software.

Until they can't. Governments and lobbyists are trying to ban universal computers.

> They just warning user this software is not notarized, could be potential do harm to your data or hardware.

As if the "notarized" software won't. ._.

On Monday, August 12, 2019 6:19:32 AM MDT Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Any applications, this includes command line applications, will require to be notarized on the latest version of macOS, Catalina (10.15), which is available as a public beta.
>
> This means that by default DMD and related applications won't run. It's possible to go into System Preference and launch the application anyway, but that's a pretty poor user experience.
>
> I've created an issue for this [1] and directly contacted a couple of core members.
>
> [1] https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20124

Wouldn't that then mean that you couldn't run anything built by dmd either? If so, then while notarizing dmd would certainly be good, I'd expect that anyone seriously using a compiler would have to figure out how to tell the OS to stop complaining about applications which aren't notarized anyway (though if they made it so that you have to do that per application instead of globally, that would get _really_ annoying).

- Jonathan M Davis

On Tuesday, 13 August 2019 at 01:56:30 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>
> As if the "notarized" software won't. ._.

Nobody says notarized won't.

On Tuesday, 13 August 2019 at 01:56:30 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>
> As if the "notarized" software won't. ._.

Nobody says "notarized" software won't.

On 2019-08-13 07:49, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> Wouldn't that then mean that you couldn't run anything built by dmd either?

I looked into this a bit more. It looks like the OS (in this version at least) only checks applications with the quarantined flag. That's an extended attribute which is set when downloading a file using a browser (tested with Safari and Chrome). When I download the same file using "curl", it's not set. So that's not as bad as I thought it was.

I can run all my existing applications, both the ones I compiled and third party applications, which are definitely not notarized.

Notarizing an application requires to adopt the Hardened runtime. This means that, among other things, it's not possible to debug an application. During development, when using Xcode, it will automatically add what's called an entitlement that allows debugging. The notarization service will reject applications with this entitlement set. So it's only for development.

> If so, then while notarizing dmd would certainly be good, I'd expect that
> anyone seriously using a compiler would have to figure out how to tell the
> OS to stop complaining about applications which aren't notarized anyway
> (though if they made it so that you have to do that per application instead
> of globally, that would get _really_ annoying).

So far I have not found a way to do that for all applications, it's currently for each binary. Perhaps if System Integrity Protection is turned off.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg