[racket-dev] OS X 10.8 includes new restrictions on running apps

From: John Clements (clements at brinckerhoff.org)
Date: Tue Feb 21 23:59:33 EST 2012

On Feb 21, 2012, at 7:54 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:

> A few minutes ago, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
>>> Also, it's likely that I don't understand, but it sounds to me
>>> like it's better to stay out of this thing since otherwise you
>>> need to commit to be sandboxed -- and if it's the same as on the
>>> ios, then a sandboxed racket is not very useful...
>> First, this isn't the same as the iOS sandbox, but it would be
>> troublesome for Racket.  For example, I don't think `require' can
>> work.
>> Second, signing doesn't imply sandboxing, I think.  Only in the Mac
>> App Store is sandboxing required.  I think we will definitely want
>> to make Racket a signed app.
> Yes to both -- but to clarify, it looks to me that in general the OS X
> thing is slowly moving closer to iOS (so I guess that sandboxing will
> get closer to it in time), and I'm also guessing that the second level
> will slowly move to adopt restrictions from the first one (becoming a
> kind of an alternative to distributing your application via the apple
> store, but otherwise almost the same).

For what it's worth, I think we're in the same bin with Eclipse and Python and every open-source compiler, so we'll at least have some company. 

As I've said before, I'll be sad but not surprised when Apple decides to become evil and I have to leave OS X for Linux. 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4624 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20120221/06c9db42/attachment.p7s>

Posted on the dev mailing list.