4 ms·
What's the story with MacPorts these days? When I used MacOS I preferred it over alternatives such as brew and was under the impression it was used and had con
by tannhaeuser 6y ago
What's the story with MacPorts these days? When I used MacOS I preferred it over alternatives such as brew and was under the impression it was used and had contributors from Apple as well.
- lloeki 6y agoMacPorts is fine (a coworker is using it daily). There's also pkgsrc and nixpkgs (I use the latter daily), which are great. That kind of vulnerability being a real possibility is one of the main drivers behind ArchMac, although I did contribute to Homebrew, I always found it to be way too complex and brittle for its own good (no offense, many of it is a design choice, it’s just my personal opinion and why I steer clear of it)
- rbanffy 6y agoThere is no story, really. It just works. Combined with virtualenvwrapper it's my daily driver. Most of my colleagues went with the pyenv route and suffer for it. In reality, there is no real reason why you couldn't have both (I do) and some things I install under brew, while others (python versions, for instance) I install under MacPorts.
- Isthatablackgsd 6y agoWait? you could have Brew and MacPorts in the same user? I read that they are impossible to co-exists due to how brew and macports handles the user folder? BTW I never tried this, I just got this Macbook Air M1 few months ago. Fearful that I will brick it.
- kergonath 6y agoMacports works fine. There is no major issue with it. It was more or less blessed by Apple at some point (using Apple infrastructure for hosting and having Apple employees contributing such as Jordan Hubbard), but I don’t think they are still involved now.
- zdw 6y agoApple's macOSforge site still lists it: https://www.macosforge.org https://www.macosforge.org It's boring technology that works well, which is what you want in a package manager.
- 1ark 6y agoUsing it since around 2006. Boring old tech that works.
- baggy_trough 6y agoWhy use anything else?