[deleted]
Homebrew 1.0.0
191–200 of 255 posts
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#192Be aware of "update bug" If Homebrew was updated on Aug 10-11th 2016 and brew update always says "Already up-to-date". you need to run: ``` cd "$(brew --repo)" && git fetch && git reset --hard origin/master && brew update ``` I had to.
It took me way too long of daily `brew update`s to notice something was wrong.
it's funny, but other than a few basic tools, most of what I get from homebrew is versionables (nvm, pyenv, etc) of other programming utilities, in that, I don't run brew update very often, usually only before installing something new via homebrew.
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#193Ugh, ugh, ugh.
I just tried Homebrew for the third time the other day and it made a complete mess of my /usr/local/bin and also screwed up my install of rvm ... never again will I give it a chance. Sorry, but IMO Homebrew is crufty, opinionated software with poor separation of concerns. Macports is the (objectively?) better choice for my needs.
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
I switched to MacPorts following the Google Analytics debacle [1] and how it was handled [2]. I had this expectation that MacPorts would be backwards and full of ancient packages but it's not - it's fantastic! The package repository is really good, the project itself is stable and it doesn't have a default-on analytics component aggregating my package data at Google. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11566720…
Last time I used Macports, the installation procedure took about six hours of compiling all packages from source (granted, that was an Atom processor). Does it support binary packages now?
Yes, official binary archives are available since MacPorts 2.0 in 2011. Due to restrictions by the various software licenses not all are distributable, though.
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#195As a developer, I'm intimidated - Homebrew sets an extremely high standard for software 1.0 release quality.
Remember how long Gmail was "beta"?
The funny thing is how quirky the gmail settings look compared to the rest of gmail these days... it works, but it just doesn't quite fit. Though on the flip side, I don't like how much they changed contacts, and that I can't initiate SMS messages from contacts web ui anymore.
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#196Ugh, ugh, ugh. I just tried Homebrew for the third time the other day and it made a complete mess of my /usr/local/bin and also screwed up my install of rvm ... never again will I give it a chance. Sorry, but IMO Homebrew is crufty, opinionated software with poor separation of concerns. Macports is the (objectively?) better choice for my needs.
> it made a complete mess of my /usr/local/bin
In that case you might be glad to hear that in v1.0.0:
> Homebrew’s default repository installation location changed to /usr/local/Homebrew to keep your /usr/local cleaner
Personally, I really like Homebrew and have never had problems (c.f. MacPorts which gave me big problems a few years ago), but I don't use /usr/local for much else, so that's probably why.
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
I personally don't use Mac OS(X), but what I understand is that Homebrew is a project designed to give the functionality of a Linux command-line package manager to OSX. For most (all? Slackware...) Linux distributions, there is ONE package manager: for Debian/Ubuntu it's APT, for Arch it's Pacman, for RedHat & friends it's RPM, etc. There is exactly one, because all the files which aren't user data or configuration a…
My issue with those APT on Debian is that I almost always have to add another PPA to download a version of something that I actually want to use. That reduces the utility of APT in my view. Having a crowdsourced list of Homebrew packages to install would be fabulous.
Not only that, but a lot of those PPAs become stale, or get replaced by others, and it's only when you upgrade the dist, that you get failures and discover this... It's pretty annoying. It would be nice to have a meta package manager for "current" PPAs for given projects that wraps apt with brew-like ability.
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except for loading the Ruby VM. Takes way too long.
Which is why for certain things like `brew --prefix` we now do it purely in Bash rather than using Ruby ;)
I guess it's a start. But even still, the most basic of commands take a good 1+ seconds on my machine. What about Ruby makes it necessary to use? What is stopping you guys from moving to something like LuaJIT?
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
He left.
Yeah I'm curious why he left. From what I could tell it sounded like changes in Swift took an act of congress basically. Which is fine, and how it should be, given how important it is to get it right. I wonder where he went.
My understanding is he just doesn't really know how to work in a big company.
Re: Homebrew 1.0.0
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's for this very reason that I'm still one of those old-school guys who still uses MacPorts. I was horrified to see this, and in my brief time using it, it actually caused me real problems, so I went back.
I switched to MacPorts following the Google Analytics debacle [1] and how it was handled [2]. I had this expectation that MacPorts would be backwards and full of ancient packages but it's not - it's fantastic! The package repository is really good, the project itself is stable and it doesn't have a default-on analytics component aggregating my package data at Google. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11566720…
Why would anoyone deliberately bother writing google analytics code in homebrew is beyond me. It should be optin or someone who is sufficiently pissed off could fork it and remove the offending code.