On 2011-08-27 12:26 , Anders F Björklund wrote: > This sounds like the discussion about using /usr/local for prefix ? > (rather than the /opt/local, which everybody confuses with /opt ...) > It's even more fun, since it's in the default search paths and thus > will affect most things afterwards - even if you don't intend it to.
/opt/macports would be the sanest choice today, but I guess it's way to late to introduce such a change without breaking lots of documentation and causing confusion. > So that's another difference between the two: MacPorts now refuses to > run if you use --prefix=/usr/local (without --with-unsupported-prefix) > while Homebrew will install things* to /usr/local by default and even > encourages you to make it group-writable for the user group "staff"... /usr/local is in use by some third-party pkg installers. And most software installs into /usr/local by default using the normal ./configure; make; make install approach. Unexperienced users often don't know what they are doing when following tutorials found on the net. Having other software install files into the MacPorts-managed prefix would definitely cause problems. Homebrew doesn't seem to care about dependencies and build correctness as much as we do. I do not understand their choise of using /usr/local. Making that writable for "staff" is just such a bad idea in terms of system security... Rainer _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev