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

Homebrew 3.0

brew.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 516 posts

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#121

Post by jaboutboul »

OskarS wrote: post #35
acomjean wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s Weird that Apple doesn’t do this themselves. It’s not like they don’t have a cash. And it’s important for devs to have up to date tooling. This intrepid band of volunteers are adding huge value to one of the largest corporations on earth. I appreciate the DIY effort of anyone who volunteers, though I see the donate tab on their website and sigh a little.

> It’s Weird that Apple doesn’t do this themselves. It’s not like they don’t have a cash. I can understand them not wanting to do it themselves. I don't think they want to take on the responsibility for maintaining all those packages (for legal reasons or otherwise). Because it's a "not officially Apple" thing, Homebrew can probably get away with a "no warranty" sticker that an official Apple project couldn't. What A…

As I mentioned in another comment, Apple supports them with hardware and technical resources. Seeing what happened with the whole CentOS mess, I am kind of glad that homebrew remains independent and can continue to do so without relying on Apple’s money.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#122

Post by ghaff »

tinyhouse wrote: post #108
ksec wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>turned down by Apple and Google It was Google. Because he didn't know what a binary tree was or something similar during the infamous Whiteboard test. But I mean it make perfect sense. Google is all about building AI, ML, Algorithm, K8S etc. Complexity is their KPI, usefulness is not. So may be it isn't so much a bad thing after all. He wouldn't have fit in. Edit: I guess the tone didn't shine through. The "all abou…

I completely disagree with this comment. Not to mention the comments to his Quora answer, suggesting he should try a TPM position... people are so out of touch. The main problem is that he went through the standard interview process. To prevent bias you need to maintain a consistent interview process and bar. All interviewers in big tech have annual trainings about this. If someone underperforms it's considered bad j…

That sounds about right. I'm guessing the last time I was hired it wouldn't have happened through a "standard interview process" because my background is somewhat eclectic and I frankly probably wouldn't tick enough of the boxes for obvious positions I might have been inclined to apply for. But people knew me, a job description was written for me, and here I am quite a few years later.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#123

Post by Steltek »

acomjean wrote: post #26
cwxm wrote: post #3

I can’t even begin to imagine how much value Max Howell (creator of Homebrew) has added to the world. It’s the recommended package manager at every place I’ve worked at and saves so much headache. I use Linux at home and package managers like AUR are great, but macOS is where the users are.

It’s Weird that Apple doesn’t do this themselves. It’s not like they don’t have a cash. And it’s important for devs to have up to date tooling. This intrepid band of volunteers are adding huge value to one of the largest corporations on earth. I appreciate the DIY effort of anyone who volunteers, though I see the donate tab on their website and sigh a little.

It saddens me as I see this massive infusion of developer time and energy being donated to one of the biggest tech companies around. If that effort had instead gone into making Linux better, which Homebrew obviously builds on, where would Linux workstations be now? Would I get a nice Linux laptop from my company instead of being forced to use a MacBook?

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#124

Post by nicolas_t »

cutler wrote: post #92
nicolas_t wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm comparing to macports. I remember a brew update that removed an old version of openssl causing all of my older ruby packages to fail. Now I would definitely not use ruby 1.9.x in production but I sometimes do have to be able to run locally antique codebases that haven't been used in a long time. I was caught off guard because a simple install of an unrelated application with homebrew destroyed a big part of my wo…

Why not just use rbenv with a $HOME/.gem directory. Much simpler as Ruby versions come with their own openssl.

I was using rbenv, but try installing an ancient version of ruby through rbenv, I have never been able to get it to work without having the existing openssl library in my system (not an issue with newer versions)

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#125

Post by faitswulff »

Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #100
cutler wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that better than a pm specifically designed for Mac?

I use Homebrew, and am genuinely appreciative of the amount of effort all the contributors have put in. However, as far as package managers go, it's kind of awful. Homebrew excels as a mechanism to install the latest software, if you don't care about breaking things. However, traditionally a package manager's job is to ensure that if you've installed something, it'll continue to run. If you've ever updated readline v…

Also any random operation can take 20 minutes to complete if you haven't used brew in a while.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#126

Post by augustl »

acomjean wrote: post #26
cwxm wrote: post #3

I can’t even begin to imagine how much value Max Howell (creator of Homebrew) has added to the world. It’s the recommended package manager at every place I’ve worked at and saves so much headache. I use Linux at home and package managers like AUR are great, but macOS is where the users are.

It’s Weird that Apple doesn’t do this themselves. It’s not like they don’t have a cash. And it’s important for devs to have up to date tooling. This intrepid band of volunteers are adding huge value to one of the largest corporations on earth. I appreciate the DIY effort of anyone who volunteers, though I see the donate tab on their website and sigh a little.

It seems to me that if you compare Apple and Microsoft, it's only the latter that cares deeply about the developer experience on their platform.

https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#127

Post by [deleted] »

peteretep wrote: post #113
cwxm wrote: post #3

I can’t even begin to imagine how much value Max Howell (creator of Homebrew) has added to the world. It’s the recommended package manager at every place I’ve worked at and saves so much headache. I use Linux at home and package managers like AUR are great, but macOS is where the users are.

Contrarian view here: brew fucking sucks. It’s the worst package manager I’ve used for doing random unwanted updates at odd times. Someone else would have filled the void if homebrew hadn’t shown up, and it would hopefully have been better. I hate that brew is good enough that it’s got some kind of local maximum such that there’s no replacement forthcoming. There, I said it.

[deleted]

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#128

Post by shagie »

mojuba wrote: post #21

Been a MacPorts user for years and I know nothing about Homebrew. To those who tried both: should a software engineer switch to Homebrew? MacPorts has its own way of dealing with dev tools and framework versioning. E.g. you can have multiple versions of complex products like PHP or MySQL at once. You can even have a GCC package for a specific target arch as a separate ports package. Does Homebrew allow these things?

MacPorts and Homebrew have a different philosophy of software installation.

MacPorts wants to have its own thing over in /opt where it has its own toolchain independent from the system tool chain.

This means that all users on the system share the same MacPorts software. This has an additional impact that it means that it requires privilege to install software there.

Homebrew, on the other hand, uses the system toolchain and tries to avoid using root.

In today's world, the "multiple versions of complex products like PHP or MySQL at once" isn't a compelling argument for me as I use docker to solve that problem.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#129

Post by flemhans »

yardie wrote: post #120
peteretep wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contrarian view here: brew fucking sucks. It’s the worst package manager I’ve used for doing random unwanted updates at odd times. Someone else would have filled the void if homebrew hadn’t shown up, and it would hopefully have been better. I hate that brew is good enough that it’s got some kind of local maximum such that there’s no replacement forthcoming. There, I said it.

Macports? They’ve been around even longer than brew. But they were always a bit too Linuxy for most Mac users.

I always thought that brew was the "Linuxy" one and Macports was FreeBSD Ports for the Mac.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#130

Post by qntty »

peteretep wrote: post #113
cwxm wrote: post #3

I can’t even begin to imagine how much value Max Howell (creator of Homebrew) has added to the world. It’s the recommended package manager at every place I’ve worked at and saves so much headache. I use Linux at home and package managers like AUR are great, but macOS is where the users are.

Contrarian view here: brew fucking sucks. It’s the worst package manager I’ve used for doing random unwanted updates at odd times. Someone else would have filled the void if homebrew hadn’t shown up, and it would hopefully have been better. I hate that brew is good enough that it’s got some kind of local maximum such that there’s no replacement forthcoming. There, I said it.

What do you mean by random unwanted updates? As far as I know, the only way to update is by running brew upgrade.
Post reply on HN