macports and OS-X upgrades
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: Rob Friefeld on 4 May 2010 20:03 In article <4bdfd7fa$0$15662$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot(a)vaxination.ca> wrote: > Is it possible that upgrading from 10.5 to 10.6 resulted in the macports > data base being zapped ? Or is this some environment variable that just > isn't set and the port command doesn't see anything ? The same thing happened to me, so FWIW it isn't something you did. I ended up cleaning out the old installation and reinstalling. Rob Friefeld
From: Jolly Roger on 5 May 2010 08:18 In article <vilain-573736.23191704052010(a)news.individual.net>, Michael Vilain <vilain(a)NOspamcop.net> wrote: > I used Fink in 10.4 and found that for the packages I was interested > there were up to 100+ dependencies. I tried downloading, > configuring, and compiling something like ImageMagick. Ugh. After 2 > frigging days I was no where close to getting a working > configuration. I'm used to downloading, configuring and compiling > the GNU and other stuff but that many dependencies was a waste of my > time. > JR, maybe you like self-flagellation, but I don't. It tends to leave > stains on the sheets. chacon a son gout Huh? I don't know what source you were trying to compile, but it couldn't have been a recent one. I've compiled ImageMagick on Mac OS X a few times in the past few years, and there are just four dependencies: freetype, ghostscript (optional), libjpeg, and libpng. Compiling each is fairly straight-forward. (And whenever I encounter a situation where I can choose between ImageMagick and GD, I'll choose GD.) > MacPorts downloaded and compiled a working version in a couple hours. That's nice. Like I said, I haven't used MacPorts in particular. I dislike that it doesn't install into /usr/local/, and I have had enough bad experiences with package managers that if I can compile something myself without too much work, I'll do that instead. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR
From: Ian Gregory on 5 May 2010 08:40 On 2010-05-05, Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > That's nice. Like I said, I haven't used MacPorts in particular. I > dislike that it doesn't install into /usr/local/, I can't think why you would care. The MacPorts FAQ explains why /usr/local is not a viable choice: http://trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ#defaultprefix Ian -- Ian Gregory http://www.zenatode.org.uk/
From: Warren Oates on 5 May 2010 08:52 In article <slrnhu2pp4.2jp.ianji33(a)zenatode.org.uk>, Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > I can't think why you would care. The MacPorts FAQ explains why > /usr/local is not a viable choice: They explain why it's not a "viable choice" _for them_, not for the rest of us who understand Unix-ish software. -- Very old woody beets will never cook tender. -- Fannie Farmer
From: Tim McNamara on 5 May 2010 09:35
In article <4be16a18$0$5342$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, Warren Oates <warren.oates(a)gmail.com> wrote: > In article <slrnhu2pp4.2jp.ianji33(a)zenatode.org.uk>, > Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > > > I can't think why you would care. The MacPorts FAQ explains why > > /usr/local is not a viable choice: > > They explain why it's not a "viable choice" _for them_, not for the > rest of us who understand Unix-ish software. Probably because MacPorts and Fink are aimed at Mac users who want to use some Unix applications and don't understand all that stuff. Creating a separate file hierarchy for the Unix stuff makes it really easy to get rid of it if/when the time comes. It also eliminates potential conflicts with Apple system updates. But for Unix-savvy experts, MacPorts and Fink may not work as well. |