git
Change link for MacOS Binary Installer to support Apple Silicon
Which download is failing?
The MacOS Binary Installer
Problem
The MacOS Binary Installer is out of date, for example it does not support Apple Silicon which has been available since November 2020.
Operating system and browser
MacOS
Steps to reproduce
- On an Apple Silicon machine without Rosetta2 installed.
- install Tim Harper's MacOS binary installer.
- After installation, running /usr/local/bin/git produces an error message saying the CPU architecture is not supported.
Other details
After going through this, I started researching what it would take to build the git installer myself for Apple Silicon. In that process, I discovered that @coderforlife has built an installer that supports Apple Silicon, and he has released it through Moravian University's github organization at: https://github.com/MoravianUniversity/git_osx_installer
I have installed the installer on a Macbook Air that does not have Rosetta2 installed and I was able to clone a repo, use git config ... and push some commits back to github. It passed my smoke test.
My suggestion is to change the link on the downloads page to point to the above repo instead of Tim Harper's.
I'm willing to PR this if there is consensus.
thanks for reporting the issue @tongfa
indeed, the original repo seems a bit abandoned ATM (PRs without any feedback for 7 months https://github.com/timcharper/git_osx_installer/pull/190)
but the project you mentioned does not seem to be releasing all versions frequently (only 2 releases under https://github.com/MoravianUniversity/git_osx_installer/releases), so I'm not totally comfortable referencing that project yet...
I am running that other repo and only recently started. My plan has been to have 2 releases a year: one in August and one in January. This lines up with an update just before each semester of school when we release new setups for our introductory course. This seems like it will be just behind by a few minor versions at each release. I can also release on-demand as it only takes a few minutes (I just posed 2.40). Is there a way I can "watch" for new releases? git doesn't make official releases through GitHub so I can't subscribe there.
Note: I (and many at the school) have been using this version on Apple Silicon and Apple Intel and the only known issues are with the GUI due to Tk library issues.
Currently, the installer is unsigned, but over the summer I plan on setting up signing so they can be installed with even fewer issues.
thanks for jumping in @coderforlife !
on our side we have a scheduled job to check for new releases. see https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/main/lib/tasks/downloads.rake
we also have a scheduled job to check new git versions and import man pages at https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/main/lib/tasks/index.rake
does this help?
@peff / @jnavila any thoughts against using this new project as source for mac versions given this info?
I took a cheap way out and used visualping.io on git-scm.com/download to tell me when there is a change in the version number. I don't plan on updating extremely rapidly, but I do guarantee at least twice a year (January and August) with some other random ones in between.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:49 AM Pedro Rijo @.***> wrote:
thanks for jumping in @coderforlife https://github.com/coderforlife !
on our side we have a scheduled job to check for new releases. see https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/main/lib/tasks/downloads.rake
we also have a scheduled job to check new git versions and import man pages at https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/main/lib/tasks/index.rake
does this help?
@peff https://github.com/peff / @jnavila https://github.com/jnavila any thoughts against using this new project as source for mac versions given this info?
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/issues/1774#issuecomment-1488284087, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALXNGD7GGXTNWQGFCPPIADW6QAQ7ANCNFSM6AAAAAAV2TLKDI . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: <git/git-scm .@.***>
I don't have a strong opinion on this new project source. In a sense, pointing to work that exists is mostly better than not, because people can choose to use it or not.
But I do think we don't have a very coherent view on software supply chain security. Linking from the site indicates at least some endorsement. Not that I think @coderforlife is trying to upload malicious packages or anything, but we could end up in a situation where, say, his laptop gets owned, a trojan version is uploaded to his GitHub repo, and then our link causes it to get distributed widely.
I'm not sure what linking from our site implies to people about the security practices of those binaries. But it feels like we're being put on the hook for those practices. And again, I'm not questioning @coderforlife's practices in particular; this is something the community probably should have figured out long ago and didn't (including for things like the existing links to @timcharper's binaries).
So I dunno. It seems like maybe something that should get input from the broader community on the mailing list. I'll send a note there.
Could GitHub actions with MacOS runners be used to build in a public manner that gives us more comfort?
I think the MacOS runners are free for public repos, but I'm not 100% sure on that.
I think the MacOS runners are free for public repos, but I'm not 100% sure on that.
They aren't. But there is a monthly time budget of 2 000 minutes (which would be 200 macOS minutes) included with free accounts and organizations.
The package only takes <5 minutes to build, but it sounds like that is 50 out of the 2000 minutes, which may be manageable.