macports and OS-X upgrades
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: Ian Gregory on 5 May 2010 11:37 On 2010-05-05, 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. Have you written your own porting system for Mac OS X then? How did you resolve the issues mentioned in the MacPorts FAQ? Ian -- Ian Gregory http://www.zenatode.org.uk/
From: Warren Oates on 5 May 2010 14:00 In article <slrnhu346f.2lj.ianji33(a)zenatode.org.uk>, Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > Have you written your own porting system for Mac OS X then? How did you > resolve the issues mentioned in the MacPorts FAQ? I don't do it that way. I don't even know what "a porting system for Mac OS X" even means. I download the tar.gz files of the stuff I need, read the README, and build it according to what I find there. I have nice fat /usr/local that I back up regularly (and that drops happily into other Intel Macs, it turns out). So, yeah, I do have my own "porting system." I only looked at the bit of the MacPorts FAQ that was referenced here; I have no use or need for MacPorts or Fink. -- Very old woody beets will never cook tender. -- Fannie Farmer
From: Ian Gregory on 5 May 2010 15:11 On 2010-05-05, Warren Oates <warren.oates(a)gmail.com> wrote: > In article <slrnhu346f.2lj.ianji33(a)zenatode.org.uk>, > Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Have you written your own porting system for Mac OS X then? How did you >> resolve the issues mentioned in the MacPorts FAQ? > > I don't do it that way. I gathered that. > I don't even know what "a porting system for Mac OS X" even means. So how can you say what is or is not a viable choice for the base directory? (It is an automated system for installing and maintaining Unix software on the Mac). Of course you don't have to use such a system, and if you choose to do it manually instead then it certainly helps to have some Unix experience. And of course you can put stuff in /usr/local, and if you have Unix experience you will be able to deal with any resulting issues as you go along. I have a hell of a lot of experience building third party software manually on Unix systems. I was paid to do it and I would do it on the Mac if someone paid me to. However, I want an easy life so I let MacPorts do it all for me. MacPorts does not put stuff in /usr/local for very good reasons - what I really don't understand is why that should matter to anyone as long as it works? The only difference is that you need /opt/local in your $PATH instead of /usr/local. Ian -- Ian Gregory http://www.zenatode.org.uk/
From: Jolly Roger on 5 May 2010 18:49 In article <slrnhu2pp4.2jp.ianji33(a)zenatode.org.uk>, Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > 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. Because I like things in one place, and I'm not going to refrain from using /usr/local just so I can become dependent on a package manager. > The MacPorts FAQ explains why > /usr/local is not a viable choice: > > http://trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ#defaultprefix > > Ian Yes, and reason #3 is indication of another problem I have with this type of package manager: if it installs duplicate software that already exists elsewhere on the system, the duplicate copy very likely will use a different configuration than the other copy on the system, an may even be of a different version. But, again, to each his own. I prefer not to use package managers, and you should do as you wish as well. -- 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: Jolly Roger on 5 May 2010 18:52
In article <vilain-372547.13162505052010(a)news.individual.net>, Michael Vilain <vilain(a)NOspamcop.net> wrote: > In article <slrnhu3gmm.2op.ianji33(a)zenatode.org.uk>, > Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > > > On 2010-05-05, Warren Oates <warren.oates(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > In article <slrnhu346f.2lj.ianji33(a)zenatode.org.uk>, > > > Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Have you written your own porting system for Mac OS X then? How did you > > >> resolve the issues mentioned in the MacPorts FAQ? > > > > > > I don't do it that way. > > > > I gathered that. > > > > > I don't even know what "a porting system for Mac OS X" even means. > > > > So how can you say what is or is not a viable choice for the base > > directory? (It is an automated system for installing and maintaining > > Unix software on the Mac). > > > > Of course you don't have to use such a system, and if you choose to do > > it manually instead then it certainly helps to have some Unix > > experience. And of course you can put stuff in /usr/local, and if you > > have Unix experience you will be able to deal with any resulting issues > > as you go along. > > > > I have a hell of a lot of experience building third party software > > manually on Unix systems. I was paid to do it and I would do it on the > > Mac if someone paid me to. However, I want an easy life so I let > > MacPorts do it all for me. MacPorts does not put stuff in /usr/local for > > very good reasons - what I really don't understand is why that should > > matter to anyone as long as it works? The only difference is that you > > need /opt/local in your $PATH instead of /usr/local. > > > > Ian > > We all have beliefs how things should or shouldn't be. JR has his own > take on "should I or shouldn't I use an administrator's account for > everyday things." This is just another of JR's beliefs. Whatever. While I do freely offer my opinion on that and other issues here, you don't see me demanding anyone have the same opinion. To each, his own. > I spent a couple days populating /usr/local with various UNIX packages > that I downloaded, built, modified config files for because they didn't > support Darwin or PPC, and installed various freeware packages. Fink > and MacPorts do all that for me. Why should I spend _days_ downloading > stuff, configuring, downloading more stuff that the original stuff > depends on, then finally finding a special incantation of configure that > will build a freeware package on MacOS? > > Yes, some of those packages had over 100+ dependencies. Apparently JR > hasn't installed one of them yet. Maybe he just likes doing that stuff. > I'll do it up to a point, but I reached that point a while back. Not > worth it to any further. YMMV. I, too, will do it up to a point. If the dependency list is too long and cumbersome on Mac OS X (this hasn't happened to me but once or twice in many years), I re-evaluate my need for that piece of software and investigate alternatives. So far, I haven't needed a package manager. I'm happy. -- 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 |