I personally consider malware anything that I cannot install with homebrew.
Jokes aside, I've loved it for many years now. Thanks!
Homebrew 3.0
41–50 of 516 posts
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#42I 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.
Was it him who was turned down by Apple and Google, after he built homebrew...?
>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 about" is a figure of speech. A more accurate wording would be, in my opinion Google doesn't know how to built great "user" Product.
And I may also include some of the Google hiring practice [1] that were brought to twitter.
[1] https://twitter.com/shaft/status/1355696154990628864?s=20
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#43I 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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacPorts (nee DarwinPorts) was started with the involvement/sponsorship of Apple and was probably the most popular Mac OS X package manager / port library around the mid-00s.
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#44Been 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?
My experience with homebrew is that it doesn't deal well with multiple version of packages at the same time. For example, it doesn't like to keep outdated openssl in parallel, which is good from a security standpoint but can make it difficult if your job involves a lot of looking at antique codebases and help with updating them... It's why I switched back to macports after briefly testing it
Can you explain exactly what you are describing:
“it doesnt deal well with multiple versions at the same time”
Also what system/os are you comparing to?
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#45This is great! Does anyone happen to know how to upgrade from the experimental Apple Silicon version (installed to an alternate prefix /opt/homebrew) that was released late last year?
It still use the /opt/homebrew for silicon bottle — so no change. I think `brew upgrade`will do the trick in fact !
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#46I 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.
If someone is doing it for free, why step up and spend money on it? /s
For sure Apple employees are using lots of homebrew every day :)
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#47I'm trying to avoid installing Rosetta 2. Anyone know if there's a way to configure Homebrew to never install an x86_64 binary and throw an error if I ask it to install a formula which isn't native on AArch64?
Isn't this just how it works already? If you install the native Apple Silicon version it seems like it either only downloads the pre-built Apple Silicon bottles (which now exist for most packages) or it builds from source. I do not think it ever downloads an x86_64 package in this mode. It was only when running Homebrew via Rosetta that this would happen.
BTW, I periodically check in Activity Monitor to see if any Intel binaries are running. The only one ever running for me so far is Signal. There is no reason to avoid Rosetta though. It is already installed and works pretty seamlessly and effectively.
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
My experience with homebrew is that it doesn't deal well with multiple version of packages at the same time. For example, it doesn't like to keep outdated openssl in parallel, which is good from a security standpoint but can make it difficult if your job involves a lot of looking at antique codebases and help with updating them... It's why I switched back to macports after briefly testing it
Can you explain exactly what you are describing: “it doesnt deal well with multiple versions at the same time” Also what system/os are you comparing to?
Nix(OS)?
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#49I 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.
[deleted]
Re: Homebrew 3.0
#50Earlier 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…
> I don't think they want to take on the responsibility for maintaining all those packages
That's not how a package manager works. The people responsible for APT/AUR do not maintain all the packages within the repositories themselves. This even applies to the App Store. Apple does not maintain the apps there themselves, it's up to the people publishing the apps. So there really isn't any reasons except they can't make money on it, hence it doesn't exist as an officially sanctioned way of pulling down programs.