4 ms·
The reasons you supply are partly why I said "there was a thing". It isn't as much of a thing in these `curl ... | sh` and `docker run` and Electron apps days.
by pritambaral 9y ago
The reasons you supply are partly why I said "there was a thing". It isn't as much of a thing in these `curl ... | sh` and `docker run` and Electron apps days.
But the first reason you cited can be handled gracefully by package managers at least (including Homebrew), if only they took the effort.
- Myrmornis 9y agoBut homebrew does use `make install` in many, many formulae doesn't it? homebrew-core/Formula$ grep 'system.*make.*install' * | wc -l 2774 I don't think I quite understand the complaints that the unix traditionalists have against homebrew. I don't mean to imply that there are no valid ones; I'd like to understand.
- pritambaral 9y agoPreface: I don't argue either in favour or against homebrew here. From the limited number of times I had to set up homebrew, I noticed the official method tells the user to take over /usr/local/ (via a `sudo chown ...`). They could have made the process use ~/.local, but don't. And because of the official position on using /usr/local/, lots of homebrew formulae assume and depend on /usr/local/. Without taking the side of the "unix traditionalists" you speak of, I can understand their point. Homebrew doesn't have to take over a system location for user-account specific software, but it does.