Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Homebrew 1.4.0

brew.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 219 posts

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#81

Post by geoelectric »

rz2k wrote: post #52
bluedino wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant, what do you prefer about one vs the other

Last I used MacPorts I thought it was more separate from MacOS, installing its own components rather than using what comes with the operating system. I preferred the MacPorts model, but when I used them both, there seemed to be a lot less support compared to Homebrew. When builds stop working, they seemed to be fixed in Homebrew before they were fixed in MacPorts, and Homebrew also seemed to have more current version…

Homebrew also seems to use its own toolchain packages if they're installed. It just doesn't insist on it like MacPorts.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#82

Post by web007 »

bluedino wrote: post #30
ketralnis wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use MacPorts pretty heavily and prefer it over homebrew. The use-case is the same as for homebrew

I meant, what do you prefer about one vs the other

I switched to Brew because I got tired of recompiling from source for every update with MacPorts. As an end-user I don't see the benefit of repeating the same thing N times for N clients versus doing it once, centrally.

Every time "boost" updates, you're stuck recompiling half your ports for the next 20 minutes to use the new library. With Brew, you wait a minute for the new packages to download, and you're done.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#84

Post by reaperducer »

spiralganglion wrote: post #62
blackRust wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look into the OS version analytics, there are 397 events registered from "macOS (10.14)". That's the next version of macOS :) https://brew.sh/analytics/os-version/

My immediate thought is that this is spoofed. I doubt anyone at Apple would be silly enough to allow software on an unannounced OS to freely send out analytic data. I expect they'd have some sort of filtering applied either right on their dev/test machines (something like Little Snitch, though surely built in-house) or at the network level.

> I doubt anyone at Apple would be silly enough to allow software on an unannounced OS to freely send out analytic data

...and you'd be wrong. It is very common for Apple to test its new browser versions on the public internet and for those version numbers to show up in the logs of popular Apple web sites. It's one of the ways that Think Secret could confirm that a new version was on the way.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#85

Post by thomnific »

rockostrich wrote: post #63
ketralnis wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what to tell you, I like it better. Different flavours for different folks. I never know what to make of "people still use ______?!" comments

Is there no specific reason why you like it better? Usually you can explain why certain software is preferable to similar software. For example, I use IntelliJ over VS Code for writing Scala because I've had difficulties getting the Ensime extensions to work properly and IntelliJ usually just works. I use VS Code over PyCharm for writing Python code because it's lighter weight and offers 99% of the features that I ne…

For myself, I like MacPorts better than Homebrew because in my experience it's subject to less breakage, less flaky interaction with tools like rvm or python, and has a better project philosophy overall. And I personally like that it's not in Ruby but I understand the opposing opinion too ;)

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#86

Post by trowawee »

tc7 wrote: post #71
trowawee wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that the response to this will be "they make $INFINITY as-is", but yes, I'd be willing to argue that they should reverse that. My basic argument would look something like: A) Writing algos on a whiteboard is not the be-all end-all of actual programming B) The skill set of "can identify things that people want and need and actually implement them" is a useful one that the person who created one of the most widel…

For a lot of the people Google needs to hire to write Google-scale code, maybe "can identify things that people want and need and actually implement them"" isn't a particularly useful skillset _to Google_, but the skill set of "ingrained knowledge of data structures useful to writing scalable, low-level code" is. I do agree that the "make things people want" is a very useful/desirable skillset for a vast array of non…

Sure, that's what I was trying to convey in the paragraph after D. That said, I think that even for a company Google's size, having those different skill sets will be useful as your business ages. Google will probably always need a number of people that have memorized every data structure known to humanity, but they would probably be better set up to avoid stagnation and continue in a position of market dominance into the future if they also have a set of people who can come up with new things and implement them.

But also maybe it's better that those people don't end up at Google et al. and that these gigantic companies stagnate and eventually die because their corporate bureaucracy/scar tissue prevents them from hiring the people who can prevent them from stagnating and dying? I dunno, haven't really fleshed this idea out too much.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#87

Post by [deleted] »

pjmlp wrote: post #53
drinchev wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really sad. I always thought there are lots of companies, acting like WhatsApp ( $1,000,000 donation to FreeBSD [1] ) and return back value to open source, the same way they got value out of it. I'm really surprised that instead of "lots" I have to write "some". I also think that it's a much bigger win, financially and for P.R., to donate some of the profits, instead of paying the taxes in selected tax-paradise…

Not at all, from my consulting experience many companies, specially the ones whose main business is not software related, hardly give anything back. FOSS is seen by upper management as a way to avoid paying for software, instead of pirating it, and contributing code back is frowned upon.

[deleted]

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#88

Post by Kpourdeilami »

spiralganglion wrote: post #62
blackRust wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look into the OS version analytics, there are 397 events registered from "macOS (10.14)". That's the next version of macOS :) https://brew.sh/analytics/os-version/

My immediate thought is that this is spoofed. I doubt anyone at Apple would be silly enough to allow software on an unannounced OS to freely send out analytic data. I expect they'd have some sort of filtering applied either right on their dev/test machines (something like Little Snitch, though surely built in-house) or at the network level.

Why would they not allow internal software send out analytics data? At this point it is common knowledge that Apple is working on a new version of OS X that will come out next year.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#89

Post by reaperducer »

drinchev wrote: post #46
joeblau wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to open source software. The site I run has 70,000+ monthly unique visitors; It's used by all of the top tech companies, and brings in about $45 a month in ad revenue. I'm not complaining because the only financial costs are my domain hosting. I chalk up my personal time to an educational investment. I'm sure Homebrew has a significantly higher value, but you've got to weigh the tradeoffs. If Homebrew cost $9…

It's really sad. I always thought there are lots of companies, acting like WhatsApp ( $1,000,000 donation to FreeBSD [1] ) and return back value to open source, the same way they got value out of it. I'm really surprised that instead of "lots" I have to write "some". I also think that it's a much bigger win, financially and for P.R., to donate some of the profits, instead of paying the taxes in selected tax-paradise…

A lot of big companies, even in 2017, don't have a very good in-house process for buying software that isn't available on CDROM from a preferred distributor (CDW, etc...)

One place I worked, it was easier to order a new work van for the department than a $30 program because the program could only be downloaded, and not bought in a box.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#90

Post by iRobbery »

dom96 wrote: post #34
iRobbery wrote: post #2

Oh nice, just upgraded everything yesterday. Side note: I find it a pity brew upgrade webcalls google analytics.

Out of curiosity, would you be more comfortable if brew webcalled a different service? one not affiliated with Google?

Well different, i would prefer it would make only calls to services that are required for what the application does, so sites' project i guess is okay, but certainly not third parties. And then certainly not any big data third parties. I'm quite sure, there are download stats for the brew application itself to monitor usage and so on.

Though i had the option to block it, using little snitch (great app, not affiliated). For web browsing i have it on never allow already, but not for all applications i use from terminal, so the little snitch, snitched about it.

Post reply on HN