VirtualBox 5.1 and 5.2 fails to install on OS X 10.13.1

Discussions related to using VirtualBox on Mac OS X hosts.
Post Reply
manderson
Posts: 2
Joined: 15. Nov 2017, 17:32

VirtualBox 5.1 and 5.2 fails to install on OS X 10.13.1

Post by manderson »

Attempting to install VirtualBox on OS X 10.13.1 fails with a message of "The installer encountered an error that causes the installation to fail. Contact the software manufacturer for assistance."

I get the same message after attempting to install versions 5.2.0 and 5.1.30. Each time I will run the uninstall script and eject the DMG. I have also restarted the system between attempts to install but this did not change the behavior.

Is this a known problem? Is there a workaround/solution?

Any assistance would be appreciated.

Thanks Michael
manderson
Posts: 2
Joined: 15. Nov 2017, 17:32

Re: VirtualBox 5.1 and 5.2 fails to install on OS X 10.13.1

Post by manderson »

After some more digging a coworker pointed me to https://github.com/caskroom/homebrew-cask/issues/39369 (I can't post U R L's, but maybe you can figure out how to rehydrate that into something useful).

Following this process, specifically dstroot's process, I was able to get it working. One thing to note about dstroot's process is that each time you run his script and then run the "brew cask reinstall..." command, if it fails you need to go back to the "Security & Privacy" settings in the System Preferences and "Approve" the new issue that's reported. After you have gone through that process several times you will find that the installation completes successfully, which means dstroot's script finally approved all the necessary kexts.

Anyway, this worked for me. Hope it helps someone else.
Last edited by socratis on 18. Nov 2017, 10:40, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed obfuscated URLs.
ChipMcK
Volunteer
Posts: 1095
Joined: 20. May 2009, 02:17
Primary OS: Mac OS X other
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Windows, OSX
Location: U S of A

Re: VirtualBox 5.1 and 5.2 fails to install on OS X 10.13.1

Post by ChipMcK »

Post Reply