3 ms·
It's been a while since I looked into it, but I opted to stick with MacPorts rather than Homebrew in large part because I got the impression that Homebrew wante
by Steuard 11y ago
It's been a while since I looked into it, but I opted to stick with MacPorts rather than Homebrew in large part because I got the impression that Homebrew wanted to own /usr/local rather than sharing it with other software. (Maybe that's inaccurate?) I still occasionally compile software by hand rather than through a package manager, and /usr/local has been the default target for a system-wide install on every Unix-style system that I've used in the past 20-ish years.
(Also, my wife and I both have active accounts on my machine, which makes me uneasy having files in a systemwide directory like /usr/local owned by one specific user. That also feels distinctly non-standard to me.)
- omribahumi 11y agoIt is possible to switch /usr/local according to [1], they state it's not recommended though. [1] https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/blob/master/share/doc/homebrew/Installation.md#alternative-installs https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/blob/master/share/doc/h...
- halostatue 11y agoI have used ~/.brew for years—it means that I have to do a slightly custom install every time I move to a new machine—but have never had a problem with it.
- mjs 11y ago> I got the impression that Homebrew wanted to own /usr/local rather than sharing it with other software This is still accurate. Homebrew creates/manages /usr/local/.git. /usr/local/.gitignore starts with /* which is … not conventional.