3 ms·

Homebrew is not dangerous. Please don't spread FUD. Your link specifically covers the case of Homebrew on the server. But Homebrew isn't meant to be a server p

by eridius 10y ago

Homebrew is not dangerous. Please don't spread FUD. Your link specifically covers the case of Homebrew on the server. But Homebrew isn't meant to be a server package manager. It's an OS X package manager, and OS X is a desktop operating system, not something that most people choose to use as a server (OS X Server exists but is primarily used for intranet stuff rather than as a production server). The complaints that your link has are only problems for an external-facing server. They're not problems for desktop use. And the simple answer to that is: don't use a desktop package manager on your server.

ghshephard 10y ago
Totally agreed. Homebrew is not an appropriate tool for server package management (It assumes everything should be installed under a single user account)- but 98-99%+ of the people that use OS X and servers are not running OS X on their servers, macmini colo users excepted. The wording dangerous was poorly used, inappropriate for server package management would have been better.
- mikemcquaid 10y ago
  "inappropriate for server package management" is totally fair. That's why we try to generally default to only listening on localhost.
SwellJoe 10y ago
I had no trouble finding people talking about using it on servers during my research. I even found people wanting it and discussing porting it for use on Linux (which is among the most ridiculous suggestions I can imagine, since Linux has an embarrassment of riches in terms of good and great package management options). So, yes, to be clear: The dangers of Homebrew are primarily when considering it for use in a server context. I personally wouldn't use it anywhere. But, it has many good qualities that many people value highly.
- eridius 10y ago
  The people who are trying to use it on servers are misguided. The people who are trying to use it on Linux are just crazy. Homebrew itself has never pretended to be anything other than an OS X package manager aimed at desktop users. If you want to say "Homebrew is dangerous when used on a public-facing server", that's entirely fair. But that's not what you said. I'm glad that you do recognize this distinction though, and I hope you will think twice before claiming again that Homebrew is dangerous without qualification.

by eridius 10y ago

ghshephard 10y ago

Totally agreed. Homebrew is not an appropriate tool for server package management (It assumes everything should be installed under a single user account)- but 98-99%+ of the people that use OS X and servers are not running OS X on their servers, macmini colo users excepted. The wording dangerous was poorly used, inappropriate for server package management would have been better.

mikemcquaid 10y ago
"inappropriate for server package management" is totally fair. That's why we try to generally default to only listening on localhost.

SwellJoe 10y ago

I had no trouble finding people talking about using it on servers during my research. I even found people wanting it and discussing porting it for use on Linux (which is among the most ridiculous suggestions I can imagine, since Linux has an embarrassment of riches in terms of good and great package management options). So, yes, to be clear: The dangers of Homebrew are primarily when considering it for use in a server context. I personally wouldn't use it anywhere. But, it has many good qualities that many people value highly.

eridius 10y ago
The people who are trying to use it on servers are misguided. The people who are trying to use it on Linux are just crazy. Homebrew itself has never pretended to be anything other than an OS X package manager aimed at desktop users. If you want to say "Homebrew is dangerous when used on a public-facing server", that's entirely fair. But that's not what you said. I'm glad that you do recognize this distinction though, and I hope you will think twice before claiming again that Homebrew is dangerous without qualification.