3 ms·

I just did this (from [1]): sudo chown -R $(whoami):admin /usr/local And not `sudo chown $(whoami):admin /usr/local`. Are both really necessary? [1]: htt

I just did this (from [1]): sudo chown -R $(whoami):admin /usr/local And not `sudo chown $(whoami):admin /usr/local`. Are both really necessary? [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10307800 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10307800

pilif 11y ago
The -R was a bit overkill - what's inside /usr/local should already have had the correct owner - the problem is the owner of /usr/local itself.
- mjs 11y ago
  The upgrade changes the permissions of all files within /usr/local to root:wheel.
  - m_eiman 11y ago
    Didn't for me, only /usr/local itself.
favadi 11y ago
No, only command with `-R` is necessary.
0x0 11y ago
I'd say the "-R" might actually be harmful; for example the mysql GPL distribution binaries from dev.mysql.com installs in /usr/local/mysql and you definitively don't want to mess with the database file permissions there. It might not be "best practice" to let non-homebrew stuff put things in /usr/local, but it happens.