I think putting a 'validated' pd in the app store is a great idea, for both pd-vanilla and pd-extended. Just alot of work.
I believe, but am not certain, that dlopen will continue to work as long as you play the 'app sandbox' game: if a user wants to load binaries from a different location in a sandboxed app, they need to give permission. Here are the juicy details: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Security/Conceptual/AppSandboxDesignGuide/AppSandboxInDepth/AppSandboxInDepth.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40011183-CH3-SW5 of importance in there is 'Securty-Scoped Bookmarks'. Note this isn't just Mac, you have to jump through the same hoops for WinRT, which hasn't really caught on yet, but its a sign that the trend nowadays is for a rediculously high level of securty, by default. On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancs...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Miller Puckette <m...@ucsd.edu> > > To: Jonathan Wilkes <jancs...@yahoo.com> > > Cc: "pd-dev@iem.at" <pd-dev@iem.at> > > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 7:12 PM > > Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Mac Os now requiring Apple signatures on all SW !? > > > >T hat sounds sensible... sounds like I can probably do nothing for now > (but > > I'm worried they're going to progressively lock things down harder in > > the > > future... this isn't going in a good direction!) > > Well, if they decide to remove the easy workaround that would be a big > enough change that we'll likely hear news from FSF and others. > > -Jonathan > > > > > M > > > >> Again, that adds credibility to a system that adds little more than a > pain > > for > >> users, and it distracts everyone other than bureaucrats. Most users > just > > want to > >> download and run your software. > >> > >> If a school sysadmin wants to misunderstand security and force > instructors > > to > >> go through the hoops, then the school or, at worst, the instructor > should > > pay you > >> to jump through the hoops and get a signing key. The end user > > shouldn't even be > >> aware of any of this, other than maybe seeing a link to the _trivial_ > > workaround > >> katja mentioned next to the version you currently have available. > >> > >> -Jonathan > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-dev mailing list > Pd-dev@iem.at > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev >
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev