“SwiftData inheritance relationship”

Just helping everyone read the post above since it lacks formatting (formatted using gen AI): Overview We have been using this API call to set the In-App Provisioning capability for 2+ years, and it just recently started returning errors. Previously Working Setup To set the In-App Provisioning capability, we had been using the App Store Connect API directly: curl https://api.appstoreconnect.apple.com/v1/bundleIdCapabilities -X POST --header Authorization: Bearer #{appleApiToken} --header Content-Type: application/json -d '{ data: { type: bundleIdCapabilities, attributes: { capabilityType: IN_APP_PASS_PROVISIONING }, relationships: { bundleId: { data: { id: #{appStoreBundleIdentifier}, type: bundleIds } } } } }' The IN_APP_PASS_PROVISIONING capability type is shown when retrieving the bundle ID capabilities, if In-App Provisioning is set on a bundle ID: curl https://api.appstoreconnect.apple.com/v1/bundleIds/#{appStoreBundleIdentifier}/bundleIdCapabilities --header Authorization: Bearer #{appleAp

Could you elaborate on how to build a model layer and how that differentiates from calling a function from a .task or .onappear function within the view level? What do I need to pass to handleAppRefresh? import Foundation import SwiftData import SwiftUI import BackgroundTasks func scheduleAppRefresh() { let request = BGAppRefreshTaskRequest(identifier: app.RoutineRefresh) // Fetch no earlier than 15 minutes from now. request.earliestBeginDate = Date(timeIntervalSinceNow: 60) do { try BGTaskScheduler.shared.submit(request) } catch { print(Could not schedule app refresh: (error)) } } func handleAppRefresh(task: BGAppRefreshTask) async { // Schedule a new refresh task. scheduleAppRefresh() // Create an operation that performs the main part of the background task. let operation = RefreshAppContentsOperation() // Provide the background task with an expiration handler that cancels the operation. task.expirationHandler = { operation.cancel() } // Inform the system that the background task is complete // whe

UIBackgroundModes was already configured in info.plist: Great! That's all you need to do. Entitlement provisioning is not an LLM hallucination it's part of the error message: Yes, I'm afraid it is. Let me start with the error message here: Automatic signing failed Xcode failed to provision this target. Please file a bug report at https://feedbackassistant.apple.com and include the Update Signing report from the Report navigator. Provisioning profile iOS Team Provisioning Profile: [app id] doesn't include the com.apple.developer.location.always and com.apple.developer.location.background entitlements. Structurally, code signing entitlements involve comparing a list of keys/values from two different sources: The entitlements embedded in your app code signature, which come from your entitlements plist. The entitlements in the embedded provisioning profile, which came from our developer portal. Critically, that also means that failures can accurately be described in two different ways: The entitlement file define

I think the answer here is “Don’t do that.” Virtualization framework is meant to be used by virtualisation apps. Such apps obviously run in a user context. A launchd agent is sufficiently close to a GUI user context that I fully expect that Virtualization will work there. Old school Unix-y context switching techniques, like the double fork thing, are generally OK if you limit yourself to Unix-y APIs, but they often cause problems when you use higher-level frameworks. That’s because they result in an inconsistent execution context, where part of the context has switched and part hasn’t. I discuss this ideal in a lot more detail in TN2083 Daemons and Agents (it’s old, but still remarkably relevant). Having said that, the immediate cause of your crash seems to be an App Sandbox re-initialisation issue. See Resolving App Sandbox Inheritance Problems. That’s not super surprising given your current setup, because this process has inherited its sandbox from your app. The best path forward depends o

getnameinfo() doesn't always fail. Its failure has nothing to do with being in this problematic state, but it is indeed because of this problem that I consider using getnameinfo() for reverse DNS. In fact, MyTransparentProxyProvider will obtain some domain names set by the extension user, which indicates that the user wants to block access to these domain names. Initially, MyTransparentProxyProvider, when intercepted UDP Flow, if the target port is 53, would take over the Flow, and deal with the relationship between the Flow data to get the IP addresses to domain names table. However, due to this DHCP issue, I added an exclusion rule, which made me no longer obtain the UDP Flow on port 53. In this case, I consider using getnameinfo() to have a look. During the process of using getnameinfo(), I will first check whether -[NEAppProxyTCPFlow remoteHostname] is available. If it can be used, there is no need for reverse DNS; otherwise, I will try reverse DNS. For Safari's Flow, the value of -[NEAppProxyTCP

What do I do with relationships? class Category { var expenses: [Expense] = [] }