3 ms·

There's nothing wrong with installing packages into /usr/local, but brew turns /usr/local into a git repository and IMO that is wrong. Also, brew acts like it's

by joseph 6y ago

There's nothing wrong with installing packages into /usr/local, but brew turns /usr/local into a git repository and IMO that is wrong. Also, brew acts like it's made for a single user, as it changes files and directories to be owned by the user running it, but /usr/local is a system directory. When I install brew, I always put it into my home directory instead of /usr/local.

mekster 6y ago
How's the experience putting it under your home? I assume many packages need to be compiled but does everything compile fine?
- joseph 6y ago
  I've never had an issue with it. I just add ~/brew/bin to my PATH and everything works fine.
- saila 6y ago
  I'm upgrading right now on Big Sur, and everything was installed from pre-built binaries; nothing was compiled locally.
vetinari 6y ago
It turns /usr/local/Homebrew into a git repository; not /usr/local itself. Whatever it links into /usr/local/{bin,include,lib,sbin,share} is just a symlink into /usr/local/Cellar.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  It used to turn /usr/local into a Git repository, at least until that got locked down with SIP.
  - vetinari 6y ago
    While /usr is locked down with SIP, /usr/local is not, it is perfectly writable; brew does create new directories there and changes ownership of existing ones.
- joseph 6y ago
  Are you sure about that? I currently have it installed in ~/brew and commands link from ~/brew/Cellar into ~/brew/bin and there is a .git directory in ~/brew. I used to put it in /usr/local and it irked me that there was a /usr/local/.git. That was the main reason I stopped putting it there.
  - vetinari 6y ago
    Yes, I'm sure, it exactly like that on this very machine where I type this comment. However, the Apple Silicon version installed into /opt/homebrew creates the repo directly in its prefix, just like yours installed into ~/brew. Here the content of Homebrew dir is mixed with Cellar, Frameworks and Caskroom, which are normally one directory up. So it looks like it behaves differently when the prefix is /usr/local.
  - plorkyeran 6y ago
    They used to put the repo in /user/local but moved it to /usr/local/Homebrew a few years ago.

by joseph 6y ago

mekster 6y ago

How's the experience putting it under your home? I assume many packages need to be compiled but does everything compile fine?

joseph 6y ago
I've never had an issue with it. I just add ~/brew/bin to my PATH and everything works fine.
saila 6y ago
I'm upgrading right now on Big Sur, and everything was installed from pre-built binaries; nothing was compiled locally.

vetinari 6y ago

It turns /usr/local/Homebrew into a git repository; not /usr/local itself. Whatever it links into /usr/local/{bin,include,lib,sbin,share} is just a symlink into /usr/local/Cellar.

saagarjha 6y ago
It used to turn /usr/local into a Git repository, at least until that got locked down with SIP.
- vetinari 6y ago
  While /usr is locked down with SIP, /usr/local is not, it is perfectly writable; brew does create new directories there and changes ownership of existing ones.
joseph 6y ago
Are you sure about that? I currently have it installed in ~/brew and commands link from ~/brew/Cellar into ~/brew/bin and there is a .git directory in ~/brew. I used to put it in /usr/local and it irked me that there was a /usr/local/.git. That was the main reason I stopped putting it there.
- vetinari 6y ago
  Yes, I'm sure, it exactly like that on this very machine where I type this comment. However, the Apple Silicon version installed into /opt/homebrew creates the repo directly in its prefix, just like yours installed into ~/brew. Here the content of Homebrew dir is mixed with Cellar, Frameworks and Caskroom, which are normally one directory up. So it looks like it behaves differently when the prefix is /usr/local.
- plorkyeran 6y ago
  They used to put the repo in /user/local but moved it to /usr/local/Homebrew a few years ago.