My app Mocawave is a music player distributed through the Mac App Store. It declares specific audio document types (public.mp3, com.microsoft.waveform-audio, public.mpeg-4-audio, public.aac-audio) in its CFBundleDocumentTypes with a Viewer role. When a user sets Mocawave as the default app for audio files and double-clicks an MP3 downloaded from the internet (which has the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute), macOS displays the alert: Apple could not verify [filename] is free of malware that may harm your Mac or compromise your privacy. This does not happen when: Opening the same file via NSOpenPanel from within the app Opening the same file with Apple's Music.app or QuickTime Player The app is: Distributed through the Mac App Store Sandboxed (com.apple.security.app-sandbox) Uses com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-write entitlement The file being opened is a regular audio file (MP3), not an executable. Since the app is sandboxed and distributed throug
Search results for
dsym file
77,659 results found
Selecting any option will automatically load the page
Post
Replies
Boosts
Views
Activity
This is a well-known problem. It actually doesn't (directly) involve your app at all. The operating system will do this with any document when you've configured the document to be opened with an app that doesn't explicitly declare support for it. Since you have declared support for this file type, the most likely explanation is that you haven't declared that support correctly. Document types are specifically for the NSDocument architecture. I don't know anything about your app so I don't know if that usage is appropriate or not. But it sounds like you just need to add some imported type identifiers for those types.
Topic:
Privacy & Security
SubTopic:
General
Tags:
On Sequoia, I want to configure my postfix as a server. And for this I have to change the way postfix is started from: /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.postfix.master.plist But this file is on the read only / file system. Then I just unloaded this startup, and made a new one in: /Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.postfix.master.plist and I was able to start it. But on the next system boot, the system one in /System/Library/LaunchDaemons was started again. How should I cleanly and permanently achieve this server basic modification?
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
Core OS
Do you have a feedback report yet? If not, would you mind to file one with a sysdiagnose, and share your report ID here? The way to capture a sysdiagnose is detailed in the instructions. Given that killing apsd makes the last notification come through, which approves the subscription for your Mac is there, and that the same code and configuration work well on iOS, and also the systems before macOS Sonoma, but just not on macOS 26.3, the issue is most likely a bug. Best, —— Ziqiao Chen Worldwide Developer Relations.
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
iCloud & Data
Tags:
I'll try to ask a question that makes sense this time :) . I'm using the following method on NSFileManager: (BOOL) getRelationship:(NSURLRelationship *) outRelationship ofDirectoryAtURL:(NSURL *) directoryURL toItemAtURL:(NSURL *) otherURL error:(NSError * *) error; Sets 'outRelationship' to NSURLRelationshipContains if the directory at 'directoryURL' directly or indirectly contains the item at 'otherURL', meaning 'directoryURL' is found while enumerating parent URLs starting from 'otherURL'. Sets 'outRelationship' to NSURLRelationshipSame if 'directoryURL' and 'otherURL' locate the same item, meaning they have the same NSURLFileResourceIdentifierKey value. If 'directoryURL' is not a directory, or does not contain 'otherURL' and they do not locate the same file, then sets 'outRelationship' to NSURLRelationshipOther. If an error occurs, returns NO and sets 'error'. So this method falsely returns NSURLRelationshipSame for different directories. One is empty, one is not. Really weird behavior. Two file
Hey Apple Developer Community, We have been on the app store for 7 years now. Our latest app submission was rejected under Guideline 4.3(a) app shares similarities in binary, metadata, and concept with apps submitted by other developers, with only minor differences. Even after multiple reviews, the reason for rejection is the same. We still found that your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a unique app with distinct content and functionality. Our app has been developed in-house and we own the entire source code. And Apple won't tell us which app this is similar to. Do they expect us to discover that? We have already filed an appeal with the App Board. Has anyone been in a similar situation? What's the best way to resolve this? Any support here will be much appreciated.
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Thanks again for reporting the issue. It seems that the issue is impacting the community, but I haven't seen any feedback report ID posted here. Do folks have any feedback report yet? If not, would you mind to file one and share your report ID here? I understand that filing an actionable feedback report takes time, but that will help. I am trying to capture the issue, and yet, my current configuration, Xcode 26.2 (17C52) + iPhone 17 Pro with iOS 26.3 (23D127) + Apple Watch series 10 with watchOS 26.3 (23S620), does work for me. Best, —— Ziqiao Chen Worldwide Developer Relations.
Topic:
Developer Tools & Services
SubTopic:
Xcode
Tags:
Hi! I am encountering an issue with the notarization process. I'll leave here the outputs of a few command that I think might be useful. user@AndreisMac % pkgutil --check-signature mypkg.pkg Package mypkg.pkg: Status: signed by a developer certificate issued by Apple for distribution Notarization: trusted by the Apple notary service Signed with a trusted timestamp on: 2026-02-18 18:46:16 +0000 Certificate Chain: ... user@AndreisMac % spctl -a -vv --type install mypkg.pkg mypkg.pkg: rejected origin=Developer ID Installer: MyComp LLC (ABCD) user@AndreisMac % xcrun notarytool submit mypkg.pkg --keychain-profile notary-profile --wait Conducting pre-submission checks for mypkg.pkg and initiating connection to the Apple notary service... Submission ID received id: e76f34b3-7c91-451c-a539-8fb39809a5bd Upload progress: 100,00% (13,3 MB of 13,3 MB) Successfully uploaded file id: e76f34b3-7c91-451c-a539-8fb39809a5bd path: /path/to/mypkg.pkg Waiting for processing to complete. Current status: Accepted..........
Hi everyone, On macOS 26.4 beta (with Xcode 26.4 beta), I’m seeing the following console messages in a brand new SwiftData + CloudKit template project (no custom logic added, fresh CloudKit container): updateTaskRequest called for a pre-running task com.apple.coredata.cloudkit.activity.export.F9EE783D-7521-4EC2-B42C-9FD1F29BA5C4 updateTaskRequest called for an already running/updated task com.apple.coredata.cloudkit.activity.export.F9EE783D-7521-4EC2-B42C-9FD1F29BA5C4 Error updating background task request: Error Domain=BGSystemTaskSchedulerErrorDomain Code=8 (null) These messages appear: When CloudKit is enabled Occasionally on app launch Often when bringing the app back to the foreground (Cmd-Tab away and back) Even with zero additional SwiftData logic They do not appear when CloudKit is disabled. This behavior is reproducible on a completely new project with a fresh CloudKit container. Questions: What exactly do these messages indicate? Is BGSystemTaskScheduler Code=8 expected in this context? Are these sa
[quote='876733022, disinghal, /thread/811887?answerId=876733022#876733022, /profile/disinghal'] URL Session is calling a public endpoint. [/quote] Right, but you’ve set up your on-demand rules to say that everything generates demand. It’d be interesting to see what happens if you configure your on-demand rules to only generate demand what you load a URL that’s behind the VPN. I suspect it’ll work consistently, but if you find that’s not the case then that’d be an interesting datapoint. [quote='876733022, disinghal, /thread/811887?answerId=876733022#876733022, /profile/disinghal'] It happens intermittently. [/quote] Fair enough. But that doesn’t really contradict the position I explained above. You’ve set yourself up for failure and that you only fail in some cases. That’s a win, right? (-: Seriously though, I don’t think I’m going to be able to help you further here. You are clearly exploring the limits of what’s possible. If you want to make the case that this should work, I recommend that you do that direct
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
Networking
Tags:
[quote='876709022, siddhant-mac, /thread/815755?answerId=876709022#876709022, /profile/siddhant-mac'] is it possible on the macOS login window? [/quote] That depends on what you mean by “it”: If you’re asking whether it’s possible to reuse infrastructure used by Platform SSO then the answer is “No.” If you’re asking whether it’s possible to create an authorisation plug-in that presents a completely passwordless experience, the answer is more nuanced. You can certainly make a lot of progress, but I don’t think there’s a complete solution. Sticking points involve FileVault, as I’ve mentioned above, and unlocking the keychain. This is especially problematic when it comes to the data protection keychain. Honestly, I don’t see a good path forward for this. The authorisation plug-in mechanism has significant issues, and I’m doubtful they’ll be addressed because of limitations in that architecture. Specifically, FileVault support is pretty critical and it’s hard to see how that can happen within the current design.
Topic:
Privacy & Security
SubTopic:
General
Tags:
@fpiovezan Thank you for joining the conversation. You have requested for me to: validate the state of Accessibility options run an experiment and file a new FB with logs attached After gathering our bearings, it's clear to me that I will not be able to provide anything new that was not already provided in FB20359822 . Can you please consult that FB ticket as it has all the extensive info and logs of using Xcode 26.2 with iOS 26.2, and what's also important, a project that reproduces the issue. As for the accessibility options, we are certain that we do not really enable anything on by hand, never. We are going to attach a video recording of our accessibility options to the same FB20359822.
Topic:
Developer Tools & Services
SubTopic:
Xcode
Tags:
After the initial setup worked for regular builds, three edge cases needed fixing. Early exit on clean (BuildPkgTestCMD.sh) The pre-action runs even when cleaning, but there’s nothing to build and nothing to clean manually — PkgTestCMD lives inside the parent’s BUILD_DIR, so Xcode cleans it automatically. We just exit early. OBJROOT isolation (BuildPkgTestCMD.sh) We were already setting SYMROOT to keep build products inside the parent’s BUILD_DIR. Turned out OBJROOT (intermediates) also needed to be isolated, otherwise building PkgTestCMD standalone would conflict and produce “entitlements modified during build” errors. TARGET_BUILD_DIR (CopyPkgTestCMD.sh + outputPaths) During archive, Xcode always creates a temporary .app directory and copies the bundle there itself — it knows exactly what files it’s putting in. Copying our binary to BUILT_PRODUCTS_DIR meant injecting a file into that directory after Xcode had already done its packaging, so Xcode had no awareness of it. TARGET_BUILD_DIR is
Topic:
Developer Tools & Services
SubTopic:
Xcode
Tags:
Hi! I have a Catalyst app that embeds command line utility. So the project has two targets: Catalyst target, this target depends on #2 and embeds it into its bundle. macOS target, the command line tool. Both targets have package dependency to the same package. I used this to embed the CMD tool. Everything builds, runs and works fine until I try to archive the project. Archiving stops early with such error: error: Multiple commands produce '/Users/kse2/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/PkgTest-clngkndczxoprpdlwefqqiqlryjt/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/PkgTest/IntermediateBuildFilesPath/UninstalledProducts/macosx/MacrosForSwift.o' note: Target 'MacrosForSwift' (project 'MacrosForSwift') has a command with output '/Users/kse2/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/PkgTest-clngkndczxoprpdlwefqqiqlryjt/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/PkgTest/IntermediateBuildFilesPath/UninstalledProducts/macosx/MacrosForSwift.o' note: Target 'MacrosForSwift' (project 'MacrosForSwift') has a comma
When disabling the opacity slider of color panels, my app crashes with unsatisfiable layout constraints. Feel free reproduce with a minimal test project: A macOS app based on the Xcode 26.0 template with only one line added to the ViewController's viewDidLoad() function: NSColorPanel.shared.showsAlpha = false The issue doesn't occur if this property is set to true or not set at all. I just filed a corresponding bug report (FB20269686), although I don't expect any feedback from Apple ... as numerous issues I reported were never updated or commented at all (after migrating from RADARs).
Topic:
UI Frameworks
SubTopic:
AppKit