OK we're still seriously OT on this thread now, but here's my 2 cents. I guess I still don't get it (Fink). If you have modest admin skills you can figure out dependencies and pre-reqs. I've yet to run into any dependency issues (at least any that weren't addressed in README or INSTALL files). I did do some binary installs of big UNIXy (X11) stuff and built others. So my assessment is Fink is not needed for experienced UNIX users, but falls far short of the sort of SW installer the non-UNIX OS X users really need.
Ken Williams wrote: > On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 04:18 PM, Heather Madrone wrote: > > And I can't see the point of fink. It didn't strike me as all that > > useful, > > just another gronky system to have to learn to use. > > Fink provides two things: > > 1) a repository of patches which get Unix software to build & install > properly on OS X > > 2) a real package management system that tracks dependencies > > I don't feel like figuring out #1 for everything I download and build, > and #2 has obvious benefits. Add to that the capability to do binary > installs of big unixy stuff like X11, and I think there's a compelling > case for Fink's existence. > > That said, I'm using it less than I used to - not because it's broken > anything for me, but because I pretty much have already installed > everything I need from it. > > -Ken
