(Bug report) Damaged macOS binary build

[robsalasco]

TriliumNext Version

0.90.4

What operating system are you using?

macOS

What is your setup?

Local + server sync

Operating System Version

macOS Sonoma 14.5

Description

I tried to use the binary provided in the download section and when I try to use it it displays the following error:

Error logs

No response

[eliandoran]

@robsalasco , I'm not able to reproduce the issue on my side, I am testing on a x86_64 mac running with Sonoma 14.4.
Are you using an ARM-based Mac by any chance?

[robsalasco]

Yes @eliandoran ! I'm using a M1 Macbook Pro

[eliandoran]

@robsalasco , could you give this binary a try? https://github.com/TriliumNext/Notes/actions/runs/10336834025/artifacts/1798653509

It's from the latest development branch where we changed a bit the build infrastructure. Maybe the issue is solved by itself.

Apart from that the build should be usable.

[robsalasco]

I tried the binary and I receive the same error :/

[eliandoran]

@robsalasco , it seems related to the notarization process, unfortunately. On our side we don't sign our apps yet since we don't have an Apple developer's certificate.

Maybe you could try this into a terminal:

$ xattr -c "/path/to/Trilium Next.app"

See:

• https://discussions.apple.com/thread/253714860
• MacOS builds unusable: App is damaged and can't be opened. You should move it to the Bin. electron-userland/electron-builder#8191

[newmedicine]

xattr -c "/path/to/Trilium Next.app"

This works for me on M2 Pro MacBook Pro running Sonoma. Sync appears to work fine

[jerodg]

I have the same issue on MacBook Pro 2023 M3 Max w/ OS 14.6.1. The Arm build for MacOS shows me the damaged error but the x86 build works as expected. I would expect the Arm build to work on Apple silicon and the x86 build to work on Intel but it seems to not be the case. Are the release packages mis-labeled by chance?

[eliandoran]

The Arm build for MacOS shows me the damaged error but the x86 build works as expected. I would expect the Arm build to work on Apple silicon and the x86 build to work on Intel but it seems to not be the case. Are the release packages mis-labeled by chance?

@jerodg , unfortunately this is not the case. It appears that this problematic behavior affects only Apple silicon builds. The x86 build I suppose it works due to the compatibility layer of Rosetta 2.

Reference: electron-userland/electron-builder#8191 (comment)