PixInsight 1.8.8-5 Released - StarNet module installation

[andrewbarton]

I think the error was probably my doing. When I realized StarNet was not loading, I started modifying permissions of the StarNet libraries to match other modules.

When I reverted back to a clean install, I never saw that error again.

I also tried installing the Tensor flow modules in /usr/local/lib but saw no change.

When I choose browse under Module Installation, I can see StarNet in the PixInsight/bin dir, it's just greyed out and not installable.

For now I am reverting back to 1.8.8-4.

Thanks for your suggestions Rob.

[pfile]

ok - anyway at some point i'll be able to sit down and experiment with this.

rob

[dave_galera]

Hi Rob,

I have just tried an initial install of -5 and I do not get the error message that Andrew reported above, all seems ok on that front, however the StarNet Module does not show in the list as reported by others.

* Scripting resources updated.
49 of 49 module(s) installed.

Processing script file: /Applications/PixInsight/etc/init.pjsr/pjsr-core-defs.js

* 1 initialization script(s) executed.

Processing script file: /Applications/PixInsight/etc/startup/startup.scp
* 1 startup script(s) executed.

_____________       ________   

[pfile]

I am checking it out right now on a 10.14.6 machine... going to create a new user and install everything from scratch

[pfile]

I guess I see the problem, however, I am not sure why this is happening now vs. before, since it seems like an OS-level (gatekeeper related) problem. however some people are reporting that it still works on -4 so perhaps it's some nuance of how -5 makes system calls to load modules.

like others, PI won't find the module on search under -5. so what I did was just add the module to the PixInsight.plist, which forces PI to try to load the module at startup time. I get this error:

Cannot load library /Applications/PixInsight/bin/StarNet-pxm.dylib: (dlopen(/Applications/PixInsight/bin/StarNet-pxm.dylib, 6): no suitable image found.  Did find:
   /Applications/PixInsight/bin/StarNet-pxm.dylib: code signature in (/Applications/PixInsight/bin/StarNet-pxm.dylib) not valid for use in process using Library Validation: mapped file has no cdhash, completely unsigned? Code has to be at least ad-hoc signed.): Module load error

which is a little weird because I thought this had been ad-hoc signed but maybe not. so maybe if I rebuild it (or just do an ad-hoc signing of the dylib, if that is separately possible) we'll be good. anyway I have to do some research.

rob

[pfile]

looking into this a little more, -5 may have been compiled in such a way that modules need to be signed by the same developer that built the application, that is, Juan. I am not 100% sure of this though. could be that a different paid apple developer account could sign the module in such a way that it will be loaded by PI.

rob

[andrewbarton]

Thanks for looking into this Rob! I think you are on the right track.

[tdgm]

Hi Rob

I too thank you for looking into this problem. i would have thought more people would have noticed this problem with the new release but either way you re on the Case Just like " Colombo"  you will always get your man.

Steve

[dave_galera]

Just like " Colombo"  you will always get your man.

Steve

Now you are showing your age LOL

[dave_galera]

Rob,

For your info when I try to do a search in add module I get a pop-up with following error message:

"
      StarNet-pxm.dylib cannot be opened because the developer cannot be verified.
      macOS cannot verify that this app is free from malware.
"

(I can't attach the screen shot because this forum craps out when I try to add it)

[pfile]

yes there is something wrong with the forum for sure.

i didn't see that particular error when i was testing this yesterday but it's certainly consistent. when i built the dylib, i didn't sign it. yesterday i tried signing it with an ad-hoc signature which didn't work, and then i made a self-signed certificate and signed it with that and that didn't work either.

it looks like there's a flag in XCode that would turn off this check and it's possible that older versions of PI were built with this flag turned off. i don't know if juan turned this on on purpose or if it is just a new default. what i have not been able to determine yet is if i were to pay the $100 to apple for a developer account and then sign the dylib with a "real" signature if it would load. there's a chance that the dylib will not load unless it is signed by the same "team" as the application was, and obviously i can't do that because juan has his own team and developer certificate with apple.

i feel like if applications were required to have all dylibs they might load signed by the same team or developer that everything would break, so perhaps just having my own real developer certificate would work.

rob

[Harry page]

Hi
Presume this is a non windows problem as I just installed it no problem in windows

Harry

[pfile]

yes this has to do with OSX's malware protection stuff.

rob

[dave_galera]

Rob,

I have been playing with this:

xattr -d com.apple.quarantine /Applications/PixInsight/bin/StarNet-pxm.dylib

Does this give you any ideas? .......unfortunately I am a mainframe (NCR Criterian and IBM AS400) developer not Unix so you may make more of it than me.

[pfile]

at least on my desktop machine the tool reports the dylib has no such attribute. i think that attribute is for files that were directly downloaded from the web (and mine was built locally.) i'll have to try it on the laptop and see. but the error messages i received point straight to the lack of a valid code signature for the dylib...

rob