Maybe you are correct. I have found a couple of other cases where Sandboxing
limits the functionality of my application.
I'm beginning to think maybe I should not Sandbox.
By the way, none of the applications I have downloaded from the MAS are
Sandboxed.
Seems to be a lot of exceptions being ma
Yes, a piece of cake for a piece of cake app.
Try doing something like iterating the file system so you can present to the
user all files of unique types you understand that can be anywhere on the
system.
The sandbox is like a cat box … to be avoided at all costs.
-koko
On Sep 15, 2012, at 3
On Sep 13, 2012, at 12:45 PM, James Merkel wrote:
> Sandboxing is not as restrictive than I though it would be.
>
> For example, the documentation for the entitlement:
> com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-write says this entitlement
> provides: "Read/write access to files the user h
Eh, I suspect it is merely that DTS did not explicitly release Ben from the
NDA when they gave him the answer. If this is a black helicopter moment,
though, then color me interested. :)
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Graham Cox wrote:
>
> On 14/09/2012, at 8:47 PM, Ben wrote:
>
> > you need
On 14/09/2012, at 8:47 PM, Ben wrote:
> you need to file a bug/use a DTS incident to find out how.
Hmmm... security through obscurity. That always works out well.
--Graham
___
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post
Scott Anguish (The Moderator) and all the people on the list,
I am also sick and tired of that, since the arguments usually derail into
ranting and pointless discussions. I also don't see any chance of this subject
going away in the future, since it's now part of the OS strategy.
So, I suggest
On 13 Sep 2012, at 23:53, Graham Cox wrote:
> If you need access to files whose paths or URLs you create programmatically
> (e.g. you select a file.foo but it has a counterpart file.bar that you also
> need to access) you can't…
>
> --Graham
Yes you can. It's not difficult, but you need to
On 14/09/2012, at 9:14 AM, Kyle Sluder wrote:
> I'm _sick_ of this argument.
I'm sick of it too. When sandboxing has finally been implemented in a way that
is non-buggy, covers all the edge cases and is reasonably straightforward for
developers to use, perhaps it will go away.
--Graham
__
Gentlemen,
I'm not a moderator, but I'm _sick_ of this argument. Can we please not
have it again?
--Kyle Sluder
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012, at 03:53 PM, Graham Cox wrote:
>
> On 14/09/2012, at 5:45 AM, James Merkel wrote:
>
> > So unless I'm missing something, sandboxing is a piece of cake.
>
>
>
On 14/09/2012, at 5:45 AM, James Merkel wrote:
> So unless I'm missing something, sandboxing is a piece of cake.
Congratulations, your app uses the file system in a simple way, and in the way
that was largely anticipated by the sandboxing design.
It's when you have slightly unusual requireme
10 matches
Mail list logo
