"macOS Mojave could not be installed on your computer" on Virtualbox

[pie05]

Hi,

I have an El Capitan VM that I want to upgrade to Mojave. Using the normal installer does not work, so I downloaded dosdude's Mojave patcher, got the full installer, and made an install iso using socratis's InstallerApp2ISO.sh. I then followed socratis's install guide. After I chose the boot.efi and booted the vdi, it showed an install bar, then after it was done, 6 hours later, it said "macOS Mojave could not be installed on your computer" and then it showed a log of errors mostly relating to something about a nonexistent battery and "power management" I would attach the log, but it would take too long to extract it with 7-zip. If the iso or the vdi I used would help, I can attach it. Please help me solve this.

Thanks in advance,

pie05

[pie05]

It wouldn't let me post urls, so I shortened them and took a screenshot. They are attached as referenced in the above post.

pie05

[pie05]

and the other one:

[socratis]

OSX 10.14 (Mojave) is not yet supported in VirtualBox.

[pie05]

I know, but I just ran it with the high sierra setting, seemed to work... until it didn't

[okiuss]

macOS (10.14 and 10.14.1) are working fine as guestOS within VB 5.2.x/6Beta.x.
You just have to use a third party EFI boot loader (e.g. Clover). This is no rocket science.
I do not know, why users don't get pointed to the right direction as a intermediate solution.
Virtualboxes EFI implementation cannot handle Mojave's boot process on apfs the right way;
... or Apple does ignore EFI standards ... who knows.
IMHO macOS 10.13 is also unsupported within VB, because of the EFI problems, when updating
the OS with major security updates (You have to fiddle around within the EFI options/shell,
otherwise EFI cannot find the right .efi file)

Can anyone tell me, why it is such a "taboo" to use third party boot loaders ?

[andyp73]

Can anyone tell me, why it is such a "taboo" to use third party boot loaders?

It is entirely up to you what you do within your guest machines. If someone, particularly someone with a measure of standing, recommends a third party bootloader then other forum members will expect that it will be supported in these forums and will ask questions about it. This is a user to user forum for VirtualBox which is why questions about forks and tools that use VirtualBox (Vagrant, etc.) get answered the way we do.

Also, you will see in the bottom right corner of the browser window a bright red Oracle logo. That means that we can't be seen to be advocating anything that is illegal or in violation of software license agreements.

-Andy.

[socratis]

Virtualboxes EFI implementation cannot handle Mojave's boot process on apfs the right way;

That's exactly what I mean it's "Not supported in VirtualBox". Exactly that.

Can anyone tell me, why it is such a "taboo" to use third party boot loaders ?

Because if you had to do the same with, let's say, Ubuntu or Win10, you would never had the decency to call it "supported".

[okiuss]

@andyp73:
"That means that we can't be seen to be advocating anything that is illegal or in violation of software license agreements."

I don't follow you. I never talked about virtualization of macOS on non Apple hardware.
Is "Clover" per se evil, because it is used in the hackintosh scene ?

ok. Lets stop this discussion.

[andyp73]

I don't follow you. I never talked about virtualization of macOS on non Apple hardware.
Is "Clover" per se evil, because it is used in the hackintosh scene ?

I'm not saying whether there is or isn't a specific problem with using Clover. I haven't looked at it to know what it is derived from and what its license terms are. I was making a more generic point for other people who may read this thread in future that what is said here can't be seen to be bringing Oracle into disrepute.

-Andy.