Re: Git/Mac refuses to install on OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion)

[David Foster <davidfstr@gmail.com>]

 > That aside; Does the package work if you reduce the security settings,
 > install it and then reset the security settings to their default
 > settings later? If so, I'd call that a reasonable workaround

It does. An even better workaround is to right-click (or Control-click) 
on the installer and select Open. This provides a slightly different 
dialog with gives an override to open the application anyway. This 
method avoids changing the OS security settings.

 > and we probably won't even have to document it since google should 
provide it

If you intend to make the workaround official, then it would be a good 
idea to at least mention it on the download page. It is poor user 
experience to require users to use Google to workaround issues in a core 
installation scenario.

--
David Foster
http://dafoster.net/

On 4/7/13 7:56 AM, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> On 04/07/2013 03:55 AM, David Foster wrote:
>> The default security settings on OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion) disallow the
>> installation of unsigned packages, with no override.
>>
>> Git/Mac 1.8.2 is not signed and therefore will not install without
>> changing
>> the OS default security settings.
>>
>
> Sounds like an OSX lockin bugture to me. If anyone can sign the package
> with any random key, then it wouldn't provide much in the way of
> security, so I guess that means one has to get a signing key form Apple,
> which I doubt they just hand out to anyone (usually it means paying
> $100 to get an "apple developer certificate). That's nonsense, ofcourse,
> but it's how they've chosen to do business.
>
> That aside; Does the package work if you reduce the security settings,
> install it and then reset the security settings to their default
> settings later? If so, I'd call that a reasonable workaround, and we
> probably won't even have to document it since google should provide it
> for git and a plethora of other useful packages.
>
> Otoh, if enough osx folks want git on the latest pussycat, I'm sure
> they'll provide a package themselves sooner or later, in which case
> you just have to wait for that to happen.
>