Tried to use my dev VM to install 10.10 and after I start the installation and the system reboots, it goes right to the Darwin boot loader screen. I can get to the recovery disk and reset target disk back to 10.9.3 but any attempt to get the startup disk to boot the 10.10 installation simply dumps me to the Darwin boot loader screen. Am I just too early trying to update to 10.10 as a VM?
OS X 10.10 Yosemeti Install Fails
- Thread starter tomwal
- Start date
Same thing here. I tried a bunch of flags (-x, -s, -v) and they all kick back to the boot loader ;-( Looking forward to try Yosemite but I can't sacrifice my main machine to it as I need it for business... but I want to try to develop for Yosemite. Looking forward for a quick work around from Parallels to get us going.
ThomasFuchs
Bit poster
Same here as well, no dice installing Yosemite after completely fresh install of Mavericks. Selecting "Macintosh HD" in the Darwin boot loader doesn't do anything (no error messages, etc.). The various options just make a black screen with no activity appear.
Only the 10.9 recovery partition can be booted from.
Only the 10.9 recovery partition can be booted from.
Hi All,
Parallels Desktop isn’t yet compatible with Yosemite, but we’ll be happy to share your problem report with them” (http://kb.parallels.com/9058)
Please reply us with the issue description and the problem report id and we will forward it to our development team so that it will be helpful
for them to work on it.
Parallels Desktop isn’t yet compatible with Yosemite, but we’ll be happy to share your problem report with them” (http://kb.parallels.com/9058)
Please reply us with the issue description and the problem report id and we will forward it to our development team so that it will be helpful
for them to work on it.
Last edited:
Sadly, I'd tend to agree that this is how it will be handled based on prior history. I've heard reports that VMWare is working just fine. May be time to make the switch.
Not quite...maybe we can rephrase the question.
The issue is not installing Parallels on top of Yosemite, it's booting Yosemite as the guest OS. The Darwin boot loader won't allow it to boot, which I suppose is more a whitelisting issue? Previous MacOSs will boot fine, so 10.9 should boot as well?
So our question would be: when will Parallels allow booting of the developer builds...or is this not possible at this time?
JB
The issue is not installing Parallels on top of Yosemite, it's booting Yosemite as the guest OS. The Darwin boot loader won't allow it to boot, which I suppose is more a whitelisting issue? Previous MacOSs will boot fine, so 10.9 should boot as well?
So our question would be: when will Parallels allow booting of the developer builds...or is this not possible at this time?
JB
Same here...the process of upgrading to a Developer Preview is covered in the Parallels KB, so it should be possible, but at this time is not working. I've bookmarked the thread.
For the Parallels team: the Darwin bootloader is a nifty little utility, but for gods sake add a keystroke-invoked delay to the verbose boot option (!!).
For the Parallels team: the Darwin bootloader is a nifty little utility, but for gods sake add a keystroke-invoked delay to the verbose boot option (!!).
theblackshawl
Bit poster
I'm having the same problem everyone else is reporting. I'm running Parallels 9.0.24229
To be fair we did ALL just get the developer preview...something was bound not to work. See
http://forum.parallels.com/showthre...-10-10-Yosemeti-(as-a-guest-OS)-compatibility
I don't mind paying upgrade fee, but not ALL THE TIME FOR ANY SLIGHT CHANGE in either Guest OS or VM OS...Sheesh
Business model seems it may cost customers...penny-wise, pound foolish perhaps?
I like the product, but don't like the extortion...
Just to be clear...this isn't parallels running inside the OS, it's the OS running inside a VM. The boot loader and device types required have not changed, so Yosemite should work just fine in a VM.
Imagine installing a new Linux 3.x+1 and then having an unbeatable vm minus guest tools after the update...it defeats the purpose of virtualization. It does happen though I agree.
That said Apple only allows virtualization on MacOS hardware, which is likely why this does not work right now. Under no circumstance do I expect Parallel (Virtuozzo) to have their product updated to run ON Yosemite after day 1 of develop release.
In our case, we're software integration and development team technical support. We do test on day 1 and don't always run the new and shiny on hardware right away. Testing protocols dictate that we test on VMs, then test hardware, then on production hardware in that order.
Ram is cheap...extra computers aren't
So for the Virtuozzo team watching this...it's an exciting release. We have dozens of developers awaiting
Can confirm Yosemite works as guest OS on VMware 6.0.3. However, VMware 6.0.3 does not work on Yosemite. So pick your poison.
After Hours
Member
Just to be clear...this isn't parallels running inside the OS, it's the OS running inside a VM. The boot loader and device types required have not changed, so Yosemite should work just fine in a VM.
That said Apple only allows virtualization on MacOS hardware, which is likely why this does not work right now. Under no circumstance do I expect Parallel (Virtuozzo) to have their product updated to run ON Yosemite after day 1 of develop release.
{snippage}
Ram is cheap...extra computers aren't
Apple changes so much under the hood on these releases that I find anything working to be more than a little amazing. The simple solution for those of us who are looking to play with a barely beta product that won't boot nicely in VM is to install on a cheap external hard drive until Parallels can catch up. They are at Day 1 (now 3) the same as us…
I imagine there are not a LOT of Parallels customers that buy every release. I tend to only because I have to be cutting edge in my support role for certain clients, but if we do a little math based on assumptions I pull out of my GI track, we might see that charging for versioning releases every year to keep up with an OS that changes every year isn't THAT obnoxious. Say they sell 40,000 licenses a year for $80. $3,200,000 gross to support what, 50 of their staff of 900, infrastructure, rent, etc.? Somehow I don't think the sales/programming/mgt team get $60K/yr salaries, but just like the rest of us -- they have to eat and pay rent, too.
Just a thought experiment before we curse them for releasing a new version to make 10.10 work in either direction.