4 ms·

I wonder why Linux users would want to use Homebrew? Are the packages not available via the normal Linux package managers?

by balac 8y ago

sambe 8y ago
Some people don't have root access.
chenzhekl 8y ago
Homebrew can be used as a package manager for C/C++ projects development and meanwhile doesn't mess up the system.
starbugs 8y ago
Consider someone writing a guide on how to install packages on multiple platforms. You only need one guide and not three based on brew. Especially interesting for Windows 10 IMO.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  Generally speaking all that documentation should consist of is "click this link to download <thing> for <os>" and maybe "extract its contents somewhere". Anything else is over-complicating the situation for no good reason. Unfortunately that has become such an ingrained part of the open source culture that we keep imagining things like this are a good idea.
danieldk 8y ago
Homebrew on Linux (known as Linuxbrew) does not require root access. Of course, Nix also works without root and has many other benefits ;).
- whenov 8y ago
  However, Nix requires you to create a /nix directory, which is not possible in some cases.
  - danieldk 8y ago
    It doesn't require it: - You can create the nix store in some directory you own. But this entails recompiling every package, because the precompiled binaries have dependencies on the store being in /nix. - If user namespaces are enabled, you can bind mount /nix to some directory that you own: https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nix_Installation_Guide https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nix_Installation_Guide Of course, it is more convenient if you can convince a sysadmin to install multi-user Nix. From there on, every user can install their own packages (in a non-conflicting manner).
    - paulnechifor 8y ago
      I don't think recompilation is required. You can use proot (like chroot) to make a local dir look like "/nix" to subprocesses. I've seen it here (but not tested it): https://gist.github.com/mbbx6spp/4f467adb4e0133063fd87e264c6b9f78 https://gist.github.com/mbbx6spp/4f467adb4e0133063fd87e264c6...
      - danieldk 8y ago
        Yes, that's a similar approach to the use of user namespaces that I mentioned, which also doesn't require recompilation. I guess proot also works on systems with user namespaces disabled (which is sometimes done for security reasons).
    - whenov 8y ago
      That’s good to know, thanks for sharing!
PurpleRamen 8y ago
Package managers can only offer what they are feeded with. And that does not include all software in all incarnations. A usual problem is that certain distributions are lacking newer versions. Or the ability to install multiple versions parallel. Something like homebrew is a solution for this.
walki 8y ago
For many packages it is difficult to get packaged for all Linux distributions. Hence if your package does not get packaged for a particular Linux distribution users can still install your package using homebrew.
alanfranz 8y ago
For many distributions (redhat, ubuntu lts, debian) packages can grow rather old. If you want something more up-to-date, linuxbrew can help. I suppose that's less useful on rolling distros like gentoo or arch.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  I think that's a good example of how the whole paradigm of package management as an application distribution mechanism (at least as implemented) is really terrible. What good is all this management if I have to bypass it and everything it supposedly provides just to get up to date software, or two versions of the same software?
  - alanfranzoni 8y ago
    I totally agree with you. I think it's pretty pointless to have terabytes of repos for software that then grows stale. But distributions often say that it's the only way to keep the whole "ecosystem" of a distribution stable. So? What I think is that Linux "distributions" are growing less and less useful nowadays. On the desktop, no Linux was able to gain significant traction, and many developers are just using Macs and Windows with WSL. On the server side, ways to "build your own distro" for creating a tuned stack for your purposes ( read: docker images ) exist and seem more useful than standard distro components. Nixos is another take. Yes, "just apt install foo" is nice, until it isn't. I think we're at a tipping point between the old and new approach.
    - jancsika 8y ago
      > But distributions often say that it's the only way to keep the whole "ecosystem" of a distribution stable. In practice, it doesn't work. I did a Debian Stretch `apt-get upgrade` and it pulled in a new version of firefox-esr that did not run on my Rockchip Chromebook. Debian was forced to do it because it was end-of-life for the older firefox-esr, and Debian's security backports policy doesn't scale for projects like Chromium and Firefox.
- jillesvangurp 8y ago
rickette 8y ago
I think this is a testament of Homebrew its success. Build a package manager for a OS that doesn't natively has one (macOS) and eventually expand to OS's that do have one (linux), because users request it / like Homebrew.
tomaspollak 8y ago
Chrome OS. Gentoo-based, but no package management available.
- blacksmith_tb 8y ago
  But not Linuxbrew, Chromebrew[1]! 1: https://skycocker.github.io/chromebrew/ https://skycocker.github.io/chromebrew/
yumyai 8y ago
It is useful when you don't have root access, like being a user in high performance computer cluster.
h1d 8y ago
There are many small utilities that's not available especially if you stick to LTS. (Even ripgrep isn't available on 18.04. I feel this more when these 'remake better alternatives with rust/go' movement started to occur.) And all you can do is hopefully find a trustworthy PPA that gets timely updates or you end up downloading it yourself and get them updated manaually. I wanted to use Linuxbrew but this seems still not too mature.

I wonder why Linux users would want to use Homebrew? Are the packages not available via the normal Linux package managers?

by balac 8y ago

I wonder why Linux users would want to use Homebrew? Are the packages not available via the normal Linux package managers?

sambe 8y ago

Some people don't have root access.

chenzhekl 8y ago

Homebrew can be used as a package manager for C/C++ projects development and meanwhile doesn't mess up the system.

starbugs 8y ago

Consider someone writing a guide on how to install packages on multiple platforms. You only need one guide and not three based on brew. Especially interesting for Windows 10 IMO.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
Generally speaking all that documentation should consist of is "click this link to download <thing> for <os>" and maybe "extract its contents somewhere". Anything else is over-complicating the situation for no good reason. Unfortunately that has become such an ingrained part of the open source culture that we keep imagining things like this are a good idea.

danieldk 8y ago

Homebrew on Linux (known as Linuxbrew) does not require root access. Of course, Nix also works without root and has many other benefits ;).

whenov 8y ago
However, Nix requires you to create a /nix directory, which is not possible in some cases.
- danieldk 8y ago
  It doesn't require it: - You can create the nix store in some directory you own. But this entails recompiling every package, because the precompiled binaries have dependencies on the store being in /nix. - If user namespaces are enabled, you can bind mount /nix to some directory that you own: https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nix_Installation_Guide https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Nix_Installation_Guide Of course, it is more convenient if you can convince a sysadmin to install multi-user Nix. From there on, every user can install their own packages (in a non-conflicting manner).
  - paulnechifor 8y ago
    I don't think recompilation is required. You can use proot (like chroot) to make a local dir look like "/nix" to subprocesses. I've seen it here (but not tested it): https://gist.github.com/mbbx6spp/4f467adb4e0133063fd87e264c6b9f78 https://gist.github.com/mbbx6spp/4f467adb4e0133063fd87e264c6...
    - danieldk 8y ago
      Yes, that's a similar approach to the use of user namespaces that I mentioned, which also doesn't require recompilation. I guess proot also works on systems with user namespaces disabled (which is sometimes done for security reasons).
  - whenov 8y ago
    That’s good to know, thanks for sharing!

PurpleRamen 8y ago

Package managers can only offer what they are feeded with. And that does not include all software in all incarnations. A usual problem is that certain distributions are lacking newer versions. Or the ability to install multiple versions parallel. Something like homebrew is a solution for this.

walki 8y ago

For many packages it is difficult to get packaged for all Linux distributions. Hence if your package does not get packaged for a particular Linux distribution users can still install your package using homebrew.

alanfranz 8y ago

For many distributions (redhat, ubuntu lts, debian) packages can grow rather old. If you want something more up-to-date, linuxbrew can help. I suppose that's less useful on rolling distros like gentoo or arch.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
I think that's a good example of how the whole paradigm of package management as an application distribution mechanism (at least as implemented) is really terrible. What good is all this management if I have to bypass it and everything it supposedly provides just to get up to date software, or two versions of the same software?
- alanfranzoni 8y ago
  I totally agree with you. I think it's pretty pointless to have terabytes of repos for software that then grows stale. But distributions often say that it's the only way to keep the whole "ecosystem" of a distribution stable. So? What I think is that Linux "distributions" are growing less and less useful nowadays. On the desktop, no Linux was able to gain significant traction, and many developers are just using Macs and Windows with WSL. On the server side, ways to "build your own distro" for creating a tuned stack for your purposes ( read: docker images ) exist and seem more useful than standard distro components. Nixos is another take. Yes, "just apt install foo" is nice, until it isn't. I think we're at a tipping point between the old and new approach.
  - jancsika 8y ago
    > But distributions often say that it's the only way to keep the whole "ecosystem" of a distribution stable. In practice, it doesn't work. I did a Debian Stretch `apt-get upgrade` and it pulled in a new version of firefox-esr that did not run on my Rockchip Chromebook. Debian was forced to do it because it was end-of-life for the older firefox-esr, and Debian's security backports policy doesn't scale for projects like Chromium and Firefox.
jillesvangurp 8y ago

rickette 8y ago

I think this is a testament of Homebrew its success. Build a package manager for a OS that doesn't natively has one (macOS) and eventually expand to OS's that do have one (linux), because users request it / like Homebrew.

tomaspollak 8y ago

Chrome OS. Gentoo-based, but no package management available.

blacksmith_tb 8y ago
But not Linuxbrew, Chromebrew[1]! 1: https://skycocker.github.io/chromebrew/ https://skycocker.github.io/chromebrew/

yumyai 8y ago

It is useful when you don't have root access, like being a user in high performance computer cluster.

h1d 8y ago

There are many small utilities that's not available especially if you stick to LTS. (Even ripgrep isn't available on 18.04. I feel this more when these 'remake better alternatives with rust/go' movement started to occur.) And all you can do is hopefully find a trustworthy PPA that gets timely updates or you end up downloading it yourself and get them updated manaually. I wanted to use Linuxbrew but this seems still not too mature.