1

Should we expect in the foreseeable future a Bitcoin Core release optimised for ARM-based Macs?

4
  • Why are people voting to close this? I am perplexed sometimes at what people vote to close. This is a perfectly reasonable question and specific to Bitcoin Core. Nov 22 '20 at 18:43
  • Well, the question sounds like it's asking for an option. Whether Bitcoin Core releases for ARM-based Macs will exist in the future depends on whether someone works on it. It would be different if the question were formulated as e.g. "Are there any technical hurdles that prevent Bitcoin Core from being compiled for ARM-based Macs?". Nov 22 '20 at 20:27
  • Ok fair enough. There is the technical hurdles part to this question but there is also the "Is it being discussed amongst core developers?", "Are there signs from those discussions that this will happen?", "How much work will it be?" "Will it need an outside contributor to work on this or is it looking like existing core developers will ensure it happens?" like questions too. Closing it seems harsh to me. Nov 22 '20 at 20:57
  • Yeah, agree - I didn't vote for closing; just giving some context why people may have an "opinion based" impression here. Nov 23 '20 at 20:33
2

Of course. QT, the GUI framework Bitcoin Core uses, is one of the most portable GUI frameworks. Sooner or later, Apple Silicon support will be added. Meanwhile you can track the progress here: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-85279

Then Core developers will do the rest: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20371

0

It was discussed at an anonymized Sydney Socratic Seminar in July. I'm assuming MacOS will continue to be supported but it is becoming harder "to build and distribute binaries in the completely reproducible, trustless manner" that Bitcoin Core would like to.

Apple is introducing these notarization requirements where we would have to build our binary and then send it to Apple servers so they could notarize it. Then they would send it back to us and that’s the only way we could distribute a binary out to end users that would run on their Macs. Obviously doing that sort of stuff is tricky for us especially if it requires more official things like having an organization. I guess we already do that in some part because we have code signing certificates but I think the direction that Apple is going is making it harder and harder for us to continue or want to continue releasing Mac OS binaries. I know some of the developers are getting less enthused about having to deal with all of Apple’s changes and distribution requirements.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.