Hacker News Reader

Comment by binaryturtle | Hacker News Reader

I don't think MacPorts users have those kind of problems.

Personally I was burnt by Homebrew many years ago already. I lost trust in any such package managers. Since then I went back to just compile everything myself (I manage about 300 packages like that in my installation.) It's not that a big of problem. Only initially when you need to bootstrap everything to replace Homebrew it was quite the time investment, of course. But now you compile like a package here or there… just follow the script. It's very quickly done.

The best thing… no clutter. Every package has its strict directory. I only symlink from that what I need into /usr/local/bin.

View on HN

Given the number of patches homebrew has to download for a number of packages, I doubt it’s that easy

When Homebrew first came out, I found its antagonistic marketing off-putting. The website used to read "MacPorts driving you to drink?" I always found its takeover of /usr/local and the lack of authentication for software installation to be strange decisions. Amusingly, its approach these days is closer to the way MacPorts has always done things.

In an odd turn of event, MacPorts has been pretty amazing to "rediscover" and I won't touch homebrew as it'll lead me to drink.

> Every package has its strict directory. I only symlink

Isn't that exactly the benefit of homebrew? It installs in one folder and symlinks. And my guess, it would've been much easier to remove extra symlinks you don't need from its package manifest rather than rewrite the whole system

Homebrew links everything by default (at least that's how it was), so you ended up with all kind of extra junk files all over the place you never needed that comes with some packages... all cluttering up things in the /usr/local main directories and the PATH.

Homebrew additionally also had bunch of other directories, a huge git checkout, etc. then add the weird permission restrictions/ limitations on top of it… many packages then stopped supporting the customisation options at some point, so you were forced to rebuild half of them yourself anyway, if you needed the respective options. Now you had even more mess in /usr/local. :-)

It may work for some, but it wasn't for me anymore (and I used Homebrew for many years before that.)

Same. When they explained why they assumed and required /usr and/or /usr/local was owned by steve or bill or whatever, with a straight face, I was gobsmacked and never touched it again.

Like, how did people so ignorant come to manage such a project? I excuse most of the users but not the authors who have the balls to call themselves "engineers" on top.

I wouldn't be suprised if they weren't the very reason shortly after that Apple took over ownership and brute force OS control over those dirs.

It's just the same on Linux though. Don't touch anything under /usr but /usr/local or you will run into issues, third-party software uses /usr/local, and that is why Macports ended up in /opt/local - guaranteed free of collisions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com