To run correctly on macOS and display all processes htop needs to be root via sudo/setuid.
You don’t know whether or not they’ve investigated this issue or not.
There’s a decent chance they have, which might explain why I haven’t had this problem because I’m running a beta of 10.13.3 and nobody else on the GitHub thread is as far as I can see.
I also haven’t seen evidence of bug reports to Apple; that might’ve helped: https://developer.apple.com/bug-reporting/
True, because the company we're discussing isn't exactly the champion of communication when it comes to things like that. A simple reply from an Apple developer that it is being looked into, that it got linked to an internal KB, would've been suffice.
1. You’re confusing Apple’s market capitalization (around $890 billion) with it’s cash on hand + marketable securities , which is only $268 billion: https://www.macrumors.com/2017/11/02/earnings-4q-2017/
Regardless, it’s not relevant to this discussion since we know all of these companies who make tens of billions each quarter have bugs and security issues.
Given your logic, there’s no excuse for Intel creating vulnerable processors going back to 1997, with literally hundreds of millions of computers that can be compromised and hacked. It wouldn’t take more than a few percent of these machines to be hacked to potentially cause havoc all over the world.
The point being: money doesn’t mean you can’t screw up; being a non-profit doesn’t let you off the hook. It’s not crazy to expect the FreeBSD team to say more than “we’ll get back to you” regarding fixes. At least the Linux guys are dealing: http://www.zdnet.com/article/major-linux-redesign-in-the-wor...
FreeBSD also doesn’t have over 1 billion vulnerable devices in the wild either; their threat model is tiny compared to what Apple and the rest of Intel’s OEM’s have to deal with.
I know, I know: Apple is always held to a different standard; they should give equal weight to an incorrect compiler flag for htop as they would for preventing more than 1 billion of their smartphones, tablets and computers from being hacked.
That's exactly what I was getting to. They should be held to a different standard.
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/63985/
They were notified in late December, before the holidays. Intel knew for 6 months at least. So even there some vendors had more time than others.
Turns out it doesn’t, but it’s not unusual for people to make these types of unsubstantiated claims; turns out it’s a build issue that conflicts with High Sierra.
The Homebrew team updated the formula so it doesn’t try to install on High Sierra until they can fix it.
[0]: https://github.com/hishamhm/htop/issues/682#issuecomment-355...
What are the unsubstantiated claims? That these people including me are lying and have made this crash up? Do you really believe that?
> turns out it’s a build issue that conflicts with High Sierra.
Thanks for checking, but what is the build issue is exactly?
The original point was that unless htop installs kernel extensions or runs as admin it shouldn't break the rest of the system. So there might be an htop issue but there is most likely a macOS issue as well.
No they are not. A lot of the same reports with same combination of htop + iTerm should prompt the company to investigate. At least when they are selling $2k "premium" machines.
> I’ve installed htop many dozens of times using Homebrew on a variety of Mac hardware
Neither did I except since I upgraded to High Sierra, happened within an hour after.
> it’s usually what’s not being reported that's the problem.
Usually is. So who from Apple is investigating what is not being reported. It seems like after enough people seeing the issue, they'd prioritize it a bit.
> Did htop ever work correctly? If so, when did that change?
Even if htop doesn't work correctly, and is complete garbage it doesn't install kernel extension and doesn't run with admin privileges so it shouldn't freeze the machine or render it unusable which is seems to do.
> it’s only the problems that are part of some narrative that make news;
The corollary there is that to make the news and get the attention, would need to build a narrative. In many cases with large companies with lots of consumers the best way to solve a problem is to make a big stink on the social media. It's unfortunate but because it's effective, that's what people use.
> but lets not make it seem worse than it actually is.
For people who see their expensive machines which used to work, stop working is pretty bad. Had these been some no-name $150 cheapo chromebooks there wouldn't be such a big deal.
And this issue might not be as serious, but you do recall the "root party" vulnerability, just a month or so ago? That was actually pretty bad, wouldn't you say? And at some point the effect is cumulative. One thing after another starts to get to people. So people will let off steam online about it.
> This is pretty underwhelming, especially given the severity of these vulnerabilities.
One is a non-profit foundation and another is a company with almost $800B in capital. There is a slight difference and different expectations there as well.