3 ms·
I am 100% with you. I did some consulting work for a startup that had this kind of thing. “Oh you are having trouble with our dev environment? We have a small s
by IgorPartola 5y ago
I am 100% with you. I did some consulting work for a startup that had this kind of thing. “Oh you are having trouble with our dev environment? We have a small script that will get you going.” Script turns out to install shit like Zoom, VS Code, Slack, reconfiguring paths, fucking up my dot files, installing and configuring Docker, etc. It was a mess and there was no reason for most of it and the parts that were needed were already broken.
Even homebrew is a little too opinionated for me. If I could run some specific bits of Mac software on Linux I would never leave Ubuntu. apt is a joy to use by comparison to all this BS.
- aspenmayer 5y agoIt’s fine to virtualize macOS on Apple hardware, so you could in theory run both via a hypervisor or boot Linux and virtualize macOS, or containerize macOS with Docker.
- sirn 5y agoI've worked on a project where its build script is reliant on the existence of Homebrew when a simple command -v would suffice. They have library paths, and everything hard-coded to Homebrew prefix. It has been such a colossal pain to modify all these scripts that I ended up installing macOS in a VM to build the project.
- theodric 5y agoMacPorts is based on apt. You might enjoy using that more than brew.
- hardlianotion 5y agoI think macports is based on bsd ports. One difference between macports and apt is that macports compiles everything from source, whereas apt gives you ready brewed binaries.
- sirn 5y agoMacPorts has been doing binary packages since MacPorts 2.0 (2011). It will compile from source when binary package is unavailable (e.g., non-default variant or newer OS release).