When I search, it's always people trying to do stuff in the background. I want my app to only do stuff when it is active. And this post https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/685525 seems to have prevented replies from the start. Which means it's just a documentation page and does not belong in the discussion forums at all, because it prevents all discussion.

I am building a Mac app that launch a GUI helper app and use XPC to communicate between them. Main app start a XPC Listener using NSXPCListener(machServiceName: "group.com.mycompany.myapp.xpc") Launch the helper app Helper app connect to the XPC service and listen command from main app. What I observe is the app seems can start XPC listener while I run it via Xcode. If I run the app using TestFlight build, or via the compiled debug binary (same one that I use on Xcode), it cannot start the XPC service. Here is what I see in the Console: [0x600000ef7570] activating connection: mach=true listener=true peer=false name=group.com.mycompany.myapp.xpc [0x600000ef7570] listener failed to activate: xpc_error=[1: Operation not permitted] Both main app and helper app are sandboxed and in the same App Group - if they were not, I cannot connect the helper app to main app. I can confirm the entitlement profiles did contain the app group. If I start the main app via xcode, and then launch the helper app manually via Finder, the helper app can connect to the XPC and everything work. It is not related to Release configuration, as the same binary work while I am debugging, but not when I open the binary manually. For context, the main app is a Catalyst app, and helper app is an AppKit app. To start a XPC listener on Catalyst, I had do it in a AppKit bridge via bundle. Given the app worked on Xcode, I believe this approach can work. I just cannot figure out why it only work while I am debugging. Any pointer to debug this issue is greatly appreciated. Thanks!

When I use BGContinuedProcessingTask to submit a task, my iPhone 12 immediately shows a notification banner displaying the task’s progress. However, on my iPhone 15 Pro Max, there’s no response — the progress UI only appears in the Dynamic Island after I background the app. Why is there a difference in behavior between these two devices? Is it possible to control the UI so that the progress indicator only appears when the app moves to the background?

Hi, This post is coming from frustration of working on using BGContinuedProcessingTask for almost 2 weeks, trying to get it to actually complete in the background after the app is backgrounded. My process will randomlly finish and not finish and have no idea why. I'm properly using and setting task?.progress.totalUnitCount = [some number] task?.progress.completedUnitCount = [increment as processed] I know this, because it all looks propler as long as the app insn't backgrounded. So it's not a progress issue. The task will ALWAYS complete. The device has full power, as it is plugged in as I run from within Xcode. So, it's not a power issue. Yes, the process will take a few minutes, but I thought that is BGContinuedProcessingTask purpose in iOS 26. For long running process that a user could place in the background and leave the app, assuming the process would actually finish. Why bother introducing a feature that only works with short tasks that don't actually need long running time in the first place.

Hi, I have some questions regarding the Background Assets Extension and DeviceCheck framework. Goal: Ensure that only users who have purchased the app can access the server's API without any user authentication using for example DeviceCheck framework and within a Background Assets Extension. My app relies on external assets, which I'm loading using the Background Assets Extension. I'm trying to determine if it's possible to obtain a challenge from the server and send a DeviceCheck assertion during this process within the Background Assets Extension. So far, I only receive session-wide authentication challenges—specifically NSURLAuthenticationMethodServerTrust in the Background Assets Extensio. I’ve tested with Basic Auth (NSURLAuthenticationMethodHTTPBasic) just for experimentation, but the delegate func backgroundDownload( _ download: BADownload, didReceive challenge: URLAuthenticationChallenge ) async -> (URLSession.AuthChallengeDisposition, URLCredential?) is never called with that authentication method. It seems task-specific challenges aren't coming through at all. Also, while the DCAppAttestService API appears to be available on macOS, DCAppAttestService.isSupported always returns false (in my testing), which suggests it's not actually supported on macOS. Can anyone confirm if that’s expected behavior?

I have several combine pipelines in my watch and iPhone app. While background tasks on the iPhone work correctly (the combine pipelines all activate), on the watch the pipelines do not get activated. I have an internal log reporting that data is being fed to the sources but is not propagating to the sinks. Thoughts?

Hello, I recently implemented a conditional debounce publisher using Swift's Combine. If a string with a length less than 2 is passed, the event is sent downstream immediately without delay. If a string with a length of 2 or more is passed, the event is emitted downstream with a 0.2-second delay. While writing test logic related to this, I noticed a strange phenomenon: sometimes the publisher, which should emit events with a 0.2-second delay, does not emit an event. The test code below should have all indices from 1 to 100 in the array, but sometimes some indices are missing, causing the assertion to fail. Even after observing completion, cancel, and output events through handleEvents, I couldn't find any cause. Am I using Combine incorrectly, or is there a bug in Combine? I would appreciate it if you could let me know. import Foundation import Combine var cancellables: Set<AnyCancellable> = [] @MainActor func text(index: Int, completion: @escaping () -> Void) { let subject = PassthroughSubject<String, Never>() let textToSent = "textToSent" subject .map { text in if text.count >= 2 { return Just<String>(text) .delay(for: .seconds(0.2), scheduler: RunLoop.main) .eraseToAnyPublisher() } else { return Just<String>(text) .eraseToAnyPublisher() } } .switchToLatest() .sink { if $0.count >= 2 { completion() } }.store(in: &cancellables) for i in 0..<textToSent.count { let stringIndex = textToSent.index(textToSent.startIndex, offsetBy: i) let stringToSent = String(textToSent[textToSent.startIndex...stringIndex]) subject.send(stringToSent) } } var array = [Int]() for i in 1...100 { text(index: i) { array.append(i) } } DispatchQueue.main.asyncAfter(deadline: .now() + 5) { for i in 1...100 { assert(array.contains(i)) } } RunLoop.main.run(until: .now + 10)

Currently I am trying to find a work around to fetch data from server and update user defaults when app is forced quit. Can anyone suggest for this ?

My app is for personal use currently, so distribution won't be a problem. It registers a privileged helper using SMAppService, and I was wondering whether there is a way to customize the authorization dialog that the system presents to the user.

I have used C APIs to create a XPC server(mach service) as a launch daemon. I use dispatch_source_create () followed by dispatch_resume() to start the listener. I dont have any code for cleaning up memory. I want to make sure that the XPC server is shutdown gracefully, without any memory leaks. I know that launchd handles the cycle and the XPC framework takes care of XPC objects. But do I need to do additional cleanup when the XPC listener is shutdown ?

SMAppService Error 108 "Unable to read plist" on macOS 15 Sequoia - Comprehensive Test Case Summary We have a fully notarized SMAppService implementation that consistently fails with Error 108 "Unable to read plist" on macOS 15 Sequoia, despite meeting all documented requirements. After systematic testing including AI-assisted analysis, we've eliminated all common causes and created a comprehensive test case. Error: SMAppServiceErrorDomain Code=108 "Unable to read plist: com.keypath.helperpoc.helper" 📋 Complete Repository: https://github.com/malpern/privileged_helper_help What We've Systematically Verified ✅ Perfect bundle structure: Helper at Contents/MacOS/, plist at Contents/Library/LaunchDaemons/ Correct SMAuthorizedClients: Embedded in helper binary via CREATE_INFOPLIST_SECTION_IN_BINARY=YES Aligned identifiers: Main app, helper, and plist all use consistent naming Production signing: Developer ID certificates with full Apple notarization and stapling BundleProgram paths: Tested both Contents/MacOS/helperpoc-helper and simplified helperpoc-helper Entitlements: Tested with and without com.apple.developer.service-management.managed-by-main-app What Makes This Different Systematic methodology: Not a "help me debug" post - we've done comprehensive testing Expert validation: AI analysis helped eliminate logical hypotheses Reproduction case: Minimal project that demonstrates the issue consistently Complete documentation: All testing steps, configurations, and results documented Use Case Context We're building a keyboard remapper that integrates with https://github.com/jtroo/kanata and needs privileged daemon registration for system-wide keyboard event interception. Key Questions Does anyone have a working SMAppService implementation on macOS 15 Sequoia? Are there undocumented macOS 15 requirements we're missing? Is Error 108 a known issue with specific workarounds? Our hypothesis: This appears to be a macOS 15 system-level issue rather than configuration error, since our implementation meets all documented Apple requirements but fails consistently. Has anyone encountered similar SMAppService issues on macOS 15, or can confirm a working implementation?

Hello, I have a question regarding the behavior of BGProcessingTaskRequest when the app is force-quit by the user via the App Switcher. Based on common understanding and various discussions — including the following Apple Developer Forum threads: Waking up an iOS app after app is … | Apple Developer Forums Will BGAppRefreshTaskRequest will … | Apple Developer Forums Background fetch after app is forc… | Apple Developer Forums …it is widely understood that iOS prevents background execution (such as background fetch, push notifications, or BGTaskScheduler) after a user force-quits an app via the App Switcher. However, in my app, I have observed that a scheduled BGProcessingTaskRequest still executes even after the app has been explicitly terminated via App Switcher. The task is scheduled using submit(_:error:), and it is clearly running some time after the app has been closed by the user. That said, the task does run, but it appears to operate under tighter constraints — for example, it may be allowed to run for a shorter duration, and network requests appear to be more restricted compared to when the app is not force-quit. My questions are: Are there any documented or undocumented exceptions that allow this kind of behavior after force-quit? Could this be a bug or a behavior change in recent iOS versions? (I am observing this on iOS 18.3, 18.4, and 18.5) Any insights, experiences, or clarifications from Apple engineers or fellow developers would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

I'm working on an enterprise product that's mainly a daemon (with Endpoint Security) without any GUI component. I'm looking into the update process for daemons/agents that was introduced with Ventura (Link), but I have to say that the entire process is just deeply unfun. Really can't stress this enough how unfun. Anyway... The product bundle now contains a dedicated Swift executable that calls SMAppService.register for both the daemon and agent. It registers the app in the system preferences login items menu, but I also get an error. Error registering daemon: Error Domain=SMAppServiceErrorDomain Code=1 "Operation not permitted" UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Operation not permitted} What could be the reason? I wouldn't need to activate the items, I just need them to be added to the list, so that I can control them via launchctl. Which leads me to my next question, how can I control bundled daemons/agents via launchctl? I tried to use launchctl enable and bootstrap, just like I do with daemons under /Library/LaunchDaemons, but all I get is sudo launchctl enable system/com.identifier.daemon sudo launchctl bootstrap /Path/to/daemon/launchdplist/inside/bundle/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.blub.plist Bootstrap failed: 5: Input/output error (not super helpful error message) I'm really frustrated by the complexity of this process and all of its pitfalls.

We would be creating N NWListener objects and M NWConnection objects in our process' communication subsystem to create server sockets, accepted client sockets on server and client sockets on clients. Both NWConnection and NWListener rely on DispatchQueue to deliver state changes, incoming connections, send/recv completions etc. What DispatchQueues should I use and why? Global Concurrent Dispatch Queue (and which QoS?) for all NWConnection and NWListener One custom concurrent queue (which QoS?) for all NWConnection and NWListener? (Does that anyways get targetted to one of the global queues?) One custom concurrent queue per NWConnection and NWListener though all targetted to Global Concurrent Dispatch Queue (and which QoS?)? One custom concurrent queue per NWConnection and NWListener though all targetted to single target custom concurrent queue? For every option above, how am I impacted in terms of parallelism, concurrency, throughput &amp; latency and how is overall system impacted (with other processes also running)? Seperate questions (sorry for the digression): Are global concurrent queues specific to a process or shared across all processes on a device? Can I safely use setSpecific on global dispatch queues in our app?

my app need tracking location all the time both foreground and background. Please suggest how to prevent the app from being terminated. or detect when app is terminated.

I've discovered that a system network extension can communicate with a LaunchDaemon (loaded using SMAppService) over XPC, provided that the XPC service name begins with the team ID. If I move the launchd daemon plist to Contents/Library/LaunchAgents and swap the SMAppService.daemon calls to SMAppService.agent calls, and remove the .privileged option to NSXPCConnection, the system extension receives "Couldn't communicate with a helper application" as an error when trying to reach the LaunchAgent advertised service. Is this limitation by design? I imagine it is, but wanted to check before I spent any more time on it.

Im using the low-level C xpc api <xpc/xpc.h> and i get this error when I run it: Underlying connection interrupted. I know this error stems from the call to xpc_session_send_message_with_reply_sync(session, message, &reply_err);. I have no previous experience with xpc or dispatch and I find the xpc docs very limited and I also found next to no code examples online. Can somebody take a look at my code and tell me what I did wrong and how to fix it? Thank you in advance. Main code: #include <stdio.h> #include <xpc/xpc.h> #include <dispatch/dispatch.h> // the context passed to mainf() struct context { char* text; xpc_session_t sess; }; // This is for later implementation and the name is also rudimentary void mainf(void* c) { //char * text = ((struct context*)c)->text; xpc_session_t session = ((struct context*)c)->sess; dispatch_queue_t messageq = dispatch_queue_create("y.ddd.main", DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL); xpc_object_t message = xpc_dictionary_create(NULL, NULL, 0); xpc_dictionary_set_string(message, "test", "eeeee"); if (session == NULL) { printf("Session is NULL\n"); exit(1); } __block xpc_rich_error_t reply_err = NULL; __block xpc_object_t reply; dispatch_sync(messageq, ^{ reply = xpc_session_send_message_with_reply_sync(session, message, &reply_err); if (reply_err != NULL) printf("Reply Error: %s\n", xpc_rich_error_copy_description(reply_err)); }); if (reply != NULL) printf("Reply: %s\n", xpc_dictionary_get_string(reply, "test")); else printf("Reply is NULL\n"); } int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { // Create seperate queue for mainf() dispatch_queue_t mainq = dispatch_queue_create("y.ddd.main", DISPATCH_QUEUE_CONCURRENT); dispatch_queue_t xpcq = dispatch_queue_create("y.ddd.xpc", NULL); // Create the context being sent to mainf struct context* c = malloc(sizeof(struct context)); c->text = malloc(sizeof("Hello")); strcpy(c->text, "Hello"); xpc_rich_error_t sess_err = NULL; xpc_session_t session = xpc_session_create_xpc_service("y.getFilec", xpcq, XPC_SESSION_CREATE_INACTIVE, &sess_err); if (sess_err != NULL) { printf("Session Create Error: %s\n", xpc_rich_error_copy_description(sess_err)); xpc_release(sess_err); exit(1); } xpc_release(sess_err); xpc_session_set_incoming_message_handler(session, ^(xpc_object_t message) { printf("message recieved\n"); }); c->sess = session; xpc_rich_error_t sess_ac_err = NULL; xpc_session_activate(session, &sess_ac_err); if (sess_err != NULL) { printf("Session Activate Error: %s\n", xpc_rich_error_copy_description(sess_ac_err)); xpc_release(sess_ac_err); exit(1); } xpc_release(sess_ac_err); xpc_retain(session); dispatch_async_f(mainq, (void*)c, mainf); xpc_release(session); dispatch_main(); } XPC Service code: #include <stdio.h> #include <xpc/xpc.h> #include <dispatch/dispatch.h> int main(void) { xpc_rich_error_t lis_err = NULL; xpc_listener_t listener = xpc_listener_create("y.getFilec", NULL, XPC_LISTENER_CREATE_INACTIVE, ^(xpc_session_t sess){ printf("Incoming Session: %s\n", xpc_session_copy_description(sess)); xpc_session_set_incoming_message_handler(sess, ^(xpc_object_t mess) { xpc_object_t repl = xpc_dictionary_create_empty(); xpc_dictionary_set_string(repl, "test", "test"); xpc_rich_error_t send_repl_err = xpc_session_send_message(sess, repl); if (send_repl_err != NULL) printf("Send Reply Error: %s\n", xpc_rich_error_copy_description(send_repl_err)); }); xpc_rich_error_t sess_ac_err = NULL; xpc_session_activate(sess, &sess_ac_err); if (sess_ac_err != NULL) printf("Session Activate: %s\n", xpc_rich_error_copy_description(sess_ac_err)); }, &lis_err); if (lis_err != NULL) { printf("Listener Error: %s\n", xpc_rich_error_copy_description(lis_err)); xpc_release(lis_err); } xpc_rich_error_t lis_ac_err = NULL; xpc_listener_activate(listener, &lis_ac_err); if (lis_ac_err != NULL) { printf("Listener Activate Error: %s\n", xpc_rich_error_copy_description(lis_ac_err)); xpc_release(lis_ac_err); } dispatch_main(); }

when we use raise in GCD, the signal handler is executed asynchronously, whereas in pthread, it is executed synchronously as expected. example: #include &lt;Foundation/Foundation.h&gt; #include &lt;pthread/pthread.h&gt; static void HandleSignal(int sigNum, siginfo_t* signalInfo, void* userContext) { printf("handle signal %d\n", sigNum); printf("begin sleep\n"); sleep(3); printf("end sleep\n"); } void InstallSignal(void) { static const int g_fatalSignals[] = { SIGABRT, SIGBUS, SIGFPE, SIGILL, SIGPIPE, SIGSEGV, SIGSYS, SIGTRAP, }; int fatalSignalsCount = sizeof(g_fatalSignals) / sizeof(int); struct sigaction action = {{0}}; action.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO | SA_ONSTACK; #if defined(__LP64__) action.sa_flags |= SA_64REGSET; #endif sigemptyset(&amp;action.sa_mask); action.sa_sigaction = &amp;HandleSignal; struct sigaction pre_sa; for(int i = 0; i &lt; fatalSignalsCount; i++) { int sigResult = sigaction(g_fatalSignals[i], &amp;action, &amp;pre_sa); } } void* RaiseAbort(void *userdata) { raise(SIGABRT); printf("signal handler has finished\n"); return NULL; } int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) { InstallSignal(); dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(0, 0), ^{ raise(SIGABRT); // abort(); // abort() is ok RaiseAbort(nullptr); }); // pthread is ok // pthread_t tid; // int ret = pthread_create(&amp;tid, NULL, RaiseAbort, NULL); // if (ret != 0) { // fprintf(stderr, "create thread failed\n"); // return EXIT_FAILURE; // } [[NSRunLoop mainRunLoop] run]; return 0; } console log: signal handler has finished handle signal 6 begin sleep end sleep

Hello, We're seeing some strange crashes and noticed the following. It's unclear if related or not. The contract for xpc_main, which internally calls dispatch_main, is This function never returns. and they are appropriately peppered with __attribute__((__noreturn__)). Documentation states: This function “parks” the main thread and waits for blocks to be submitted to the main queue. However, internally, dispatch_main calls pthread_exit. pthread_exit's documentation states that: After a thread has terminated, the result of access to local (auto) variables of the thread is undefined. Thus, references to local variables of the exiting thread should not be used for the pthread_exit() value_ptr parameter value. I'd say the two contracts of This function never returns. and thread exiting with its storage released are diametrically opposed and can create nuanced issues. Consider the following code: struct asd { int a; }; struct asd* ptr; void fff(void* ctx) { while(true) { printf("%d\n", ptr->a); ptr->a = (ptr->a + 1); usleep(100000); } } int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) { struct asd zxc; zxc.a = 1; ptr = &zxc; dispatch_async_f(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_HIGH, 0), NULL, fff); dispatch_main(); return 0; } This is a gross over-simplification of the code we have, but in the same "spirit". We have a C++ object that is created on the stack and exposes one of its members as a global pointer, with the assumption that it would never release. What I understand from This function never returns is that the calling thread remains dormant and its stack remains alive. What I understand from pthread_exit is that the thread is killed (this is verified with a debugger attached) and its stack storage is released. Another thing that is throwing me off is that no sanitizer that is provided by clang/Xcode catches this issue. I don't see any special handling of the internal pthread_t in libdispatch to keep the stack storage alive. Our code is more complex, but can be solved by allocating the initial object on the heap, rather than on the stack. But still I would like to understand if this is the expected behavior. Perhaps my preconception of __attribute__((__noreturn__)) is wrong, and accessing stack variables post call to a __attribute__((__noreturn__)) function is UB? Thanks

All the nuances of when and whether a background task runs aside, does launching the app cancel the currently scheduled refresh task? As an example, consider the following case: 8AM - user launches app. This launch schedules a background refresh for 12 hours later, at 8PM 12PM (noon) - user launches the app, views some content, then exits the app. Does the scheduled refresh for 8PM still exist, or does the launch at noon invalidate that task, since the refresh could conceivably be handled during that noon launch? Hopefully this is articulated clearly enough, but I'm trying to understand the specifics of background refresh behavior, since I don't want to run that refresh every time the app is opened. However, if opening the app invalidates scheduled refreshes, I will need to include logic that will reschedule the refresh accordingly.