Re: homebrew and macports together?
Create a homebrew port of awesome. That way, not only will you get what you wanted, but everyone will benefit from the fruits of your labor. ... or take the more enlightened route and switch to using exclusively MacPorts ;) Is there anything Homebrew has than MP doesn't ? ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
:) Not much, if any. But the reverse is constantly true. LaTeX is the one that got me to convert people in the CS department. —Mark ___ Mark E. Anderson e...@emer.net On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Chris Jones jon...@hep.phy.cam.ac.ukwrote: Create a homebrew port of awesome. That way, not only will you get what you wanted, but everyone will benefit from the fruits of your labor. ... or take the more enlightened route and switch to using exclusively MacPorts ;) Is there anything Homebrew has than MP doesn't ? __**_ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.**macosforge.orgmacports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/**mailman/listinfo/macports-**usershttps://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
Please enlighten, convert people to what and why? Regards, Bradley Giesbrecht (pixilla) On Aug 9, 2013, at 6:32 AM, Mark Anderson wrote: :) Not much, if any. But the reverse is constantly true. LaTeX is the one that got me to convert people in the CS department. —Mark ___ Mark E. Anderson e...@emer.net On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Chris Jones jon...@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk wrote: Create a homebrew port of awesome. That way, not only will you get what you wanted, but everyone will benefit from the fruits of your labor. ... or take the more enlightened route and switch to using exclusively MacPorts ;) Is there anything Homebrew has than MP doesn't ? ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
He converted people to MacPorts because we have what Homebrew does not (that, and, you know, being a package manager). Please enlighten, convert people to what and why? :) Not much, if any. But the reverse is constantly true. LaTeX is the one that got me to convert people in the CS department. Is there anything Homebrew has than MP doesn't ? ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
On Jul 04 09:44:06, rai...@krugs.de wrote: Hi I am using homebrew at the moment, but there are certain packges, which are not on homebrew (e.g. awesome and kde apps). Create a homebrew port of awesome. That way, not only will you get what you wanted, but everyone will benefit from the fruits of your labor. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
On Jul 5, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Brandon Allbery allber...@gmail.com wrote: $PATH is only one of the possible problems. Does homebrew prevent promiscuous configure scripts from scanning /sw, /opt/local, etc. for libraries? If GNU's Autotools were really functional in practice, we wouldn't need package managers… :) Personally, I am using a brute-force methods which is quite effective: before compiling for a package manager, I rename the other sandboxes by appending an _off suffix. To automate things and restore the original paths, I started with a simple MacRuby script which evolved in a full GUI [1]: unfortunately, Sansonetti's team is working almost exclusively on RubyMotion these days and the future of MacRuby seems doomed by the deprecation of garbage collection in Mavericks. The only disadvantage that I found in renaming paths is that you have to add both paths to the Privacy panel of the Spotlight preferences, otherwise the indexing demon is constantly restarted and wasting CPU time. [1] https://github.com/gui-dos/Guigna ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
On Jul 4, 2013, at 02:44, Rainer M Krug wrote: This would then mean, that two package managers can co-exist, or only that macports can work reliably with homebrew installed, but not the other way round? With the latest Homebrew 0.9.3 it’s quite the contrary. Thanks to the new “Superenv”, the user’s PATH is ignored completely: https://github.com/mxcl/homebrew/wiki/Homebrew-0.9.3. Guido — https://github.com/gui-dos/Guigna ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Guido Soranzio guido.soran...@gmail.comwrote: On Jul 4, 2013, at 02:44, Rainer M Krug wrote: This would then mean, that two package managers can co-exist, or only that macports can work reliably with homebrew installed, but not the other way round? With the latest Homebrew 0.9.3 it’s quite the contrary. Thanks to the new “Superenv”, the user’s PATH is ignored completely: $PATH is only one of the possible problems. Does homebrew prevent promiscuous configure scripts from scanning /sw, /opt/local, etc. for libraries? -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
With the latest Homebrew 0.9.3 it’s quite the contrary. Thanks to the new “Superenv”, the user’s PATH is ignored completely: https://github.com/mxcl/homebrew/wiki/Homebrew-0.9.3. Pardon me if I'm slightly amused by what they've done. Homebrew (in contrast to MP) is all about using what's bundled with the system -- right? From the link above: We can prevent a good deal of breakage, and it ensures that Homebrew uses the same executables that the compiler sees (and not those bundled with the system). - Eric ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Rainer M Krug wrote: Hi I am using homebrew at the moment, but there are certain packges, which are not on homebrew (e.g. awesome and kde apps). Therefore I am thinking abiout using these two package managers in parallel. I know this *can* cause problems, but is it likely to cause problems? What do I have to be aware about? Any experiences? If you need those packages only occasionally, you could create a shortcut to switch the PATH settings. Often the most problems can be prevented by including just MacPorts or just Homebrew into PATH and leaving the other one out. The most problematic part is probably if you have Homebrew in PATH before MacPorts and you try to install a MacPorts package from source (or vice versa). Apart from that my personal opinion is just try. Some software is written in such a way that it explicitly looks for libraries in /sw or /opt/local to be more user-friendly and account for the fact that users might have dependencies in Fink, Macports, ... It could happen that a package that you try to install with Homebrew would accidentally pick up its dependency from MacPorts. All these are bugs that can/should be reported and fixed, it's just that you never know in advance and developers rarely test such configurations. Mojca ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
Mojca Miklavec mojca.miklavec.li...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Rainer M Krug wrote: Hi I am using homebrew at the moment, but there are certain packges, which are not on homebrew (e.g. awesome and kde apps). Therefore I am thinking abiout using these two package managers in parallel. I know this *can* cause problems, but is it likely to cause problems? What do I have to be aware about? Any experiences? If you need those packages only occasionally, you could create a shortcut to switch the PATH settings. Often the most problems can be prevented by including just MacPorts or just Homebrew into PATH and leaving the other one out. I thought along the same lines - but I am thinking of trying to use awesome windows manager (macports only) and at the same time I am using offlineimap and notmuch which are installed via homebrew - so this wont work in this case. The most problematic part is probably if you have Homebrew in PATH before MacPorts and you try to install a MacPorts package from source (or vice versa). Apart from that my personal opinion is just try. Some software is written in such a way that it explicitly looks for libraries in /sw or /opt/local to be more user-friendly and account for the fact that users might have dependencies in Fink, Macports, ... It could happen that a package that you try to install with Homebrew would accidentally pick up its dependency from MacPorts. All these are bugs that can/should be reported and fixed, it's just that you never know in advance and developers rarely test such configurations. Thanks - I will see what I do - I might switch completely to macports? I will see. Rainer Mojca -- Rainer M. Krug email: RMKrugatgmaildotcom ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
Hi, On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 09:44:06AM +0200, Rainer M Krug wrote: Therefore I am thinking abiout using these two package managers in parallel. I know this *can* cause problems, but is it likely to cause problems? What do I have to be aware about? Any experiences? Unfortunately it is rather likely to produce hard-to-debug problems. However, I am working on a mechanism built into port to prevent problems with homebrew or fink co-installed on the same machine called trace mode. It works by hiding files in /usr/local and /sw (amongst others) from the build process. Unfortunately it was broken for quite a while now and I've only recently gotten to fix it. If you want to give it a shot, you should probably use trunk for now (although I'm planning to get it into the upcoming 2.2 release). -- Clemens Lang ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
Clemens Lang c...@macports.org writes: Hi, On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 09:44:06AM +0200, Rainer M Krug wrote: Therefore I am thinking abiout using these two package managers in parallel. I know this *can* cause problems, but is it likely to cause problems? What do I have to be aware about? Any experiences? Unfortunately it is rather likely to produce hard-to-debug problems. However, I am working on a mechanism built into port to prevent problems with homebrew or fink co-installed on the same machine called trace mode. It works by hiding files in /usr/local and /sw (amongst others) from the build process. Unfortunately it was broken for quite a while now and I've only recently gotten to fix it. If you want to give it a shot, you should probably use trunk for now (although I'm planning to get it into the upcoming 2.2 release). #secure method=pgpmime mode=sign Sounds great - I will probably wait then for the 2.2 release. This would then mean, that two package managers can co-exist, or only that macports can work reliably with homebrew installed, but not the other way round? Rainer -- Rainer M. Krug email: RMKrugatgmaildotcom ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Rainer M Krug wrote: Mojca Miklavec writes: I thought along the same lines - but I am thinking of trying to use awesome windows manager (macports only) and at the same time I am using offlineimap and notmuch which are installed via homebrew - so this wont work in this case. I don't know how these programs work, but apart from the need for removing Homebrew/MacPorts from PATH during installation (also in the spirit of what Clemens Lang wrote), I believe that having both in PATH while using the programs should mostly work. In many cases it's not even necessary that you have MacPorts in PATH at all to be able to run its programs. Details really depend on individual programs (and I don't know any of those you mention). from the other post This would then mean, that two package managers can co-exist, or only that macports can work reliably with homebrew installed, but not the other way round? It means that MacPorts installation should not have problems if Homebrew is in PATH. Homebrew can still have problems with interfering programs from MacPorts unless Homebrew does the same. It also makes a huge difference when you decide which one comes first in PATH I would suggest you to simply try (and don't complain too much in case of problems ;). Mojca ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
Mojca Miklavec mojca.miklavec.li...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Rainer M Krug wrote: Mojca Miklavec writes: I thought along the same lines - but I am thinking of trying to use awesome windows manager (macports only) and at the same time I am using offlineimap and notmuch which are installed via homebrew - so this wont work in this case. I don't know how these programs work, but apart from the need for removing Homebrew/MacPorts from PATH during installation (also in the spirit of what Clemens Lang wrote), I believe that having both in PATH while using the programs should mostly work. In many cases it's not even necessary that you have MacPorts in PATH at all to be able to run its programs. Details really depend on individual programs (and I don't know any of those you mention). Thanks - that clarifies. from the other post This would then mean, that two package managers can co-exist, or only that macports can work reliably with homebrew installed, but not the other way round? It means that MacPorts installation should not have problems if Homebrew is in PATH. Homebrew can still have problems with interfering programs from MacPorts unless Homebrew does the same. It also makes a huge difference when you decide which one comes first in PATH Ok. I would suggest you to simply try (and don't complain too much in case of problems ;). No worries - I guess using two package managers is like entering a mine field which is surrounded by huge red signs saying: DO NOT ENTER ENTERING AT OWN RISK Cheers, Rainer Mojca #secure method=pgpmime mode=sign -- Rainer M. Krug email: RMKrugatgmaildotcom ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
On Jul 4, 2013, at 02:44, Rainer M Krug wrote: I am using homebrew at the moment, but there are certain packges, which are not on homebrew (e.g. awesome and kde apps). Therefore I am thinking abiout using these two package managers in parallel. I know this *can* cause problems, but is it likely to cause problems? What do I have to be aware about? Any experiences? Unlike some of the other responders in this thread, I will advise you not to try this. We do not support this configuration, for some of the reasons already stated, and if we discover you are using this configuration when you ask for help, we will decline to help you until you uninstall your non-MacPorts package managers. On Jul 4, 2013, at 03:27, Rainer M Krug wrote: I thought along the same lines - but I am thinking of trying to use awesome windows manager (macports only) and at the same time I am using offlineimap and notmuch which are installed via homebrew - so this wont work in this case. offlineimap and notmuch are of course available in MacPorts as well. Thanks - I will see what I do - I might switch completely to macports? I will see. I would recommend you give that a try. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: homebrew and macports together?
Great job! Thanks! On 4 Jul 2013, at 11:07, Clemens Lang wrote: I am working on a mechanism built into port to prevent problems with homebrew or fink co-installed on the same machine -- Eneko Gotzon Ares ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
