Me too. I certainly don't have any interest in turning this into another /usr/local rehash, for sure, as that is pointless.
Just recognizing what is going on out there, and trying to stay as relevant as possible in a VHS / Beta sorta way. homebrew is easier to use, and works for 99% of people without any trouble. MacPorts is better in most ways, but a bit harder to use, and has more of a learning curve to it. Once you start installing _all_ software using a Portfile, I find it's way easier to use MacPorts. Ken On 2018-02-14, at 2:13 PM, Peter West wrote: > One of the reasons I prefer MacPorts is that it does NOT install in > /usr/local. > > I am still in the habit of thinking that /usr/local is a system directory > that is expected to be inaccessible to the masses (me in this case.) Some > independent installers, like that for mysql, installed in /usr/local, and I > presume the thinking is similar. > > When Apple declared open season on /usr/local, was it because of the > difficulties posed by SIP, or did it precede that? > > I’ve had some success installing brew in /opt/homebrew, despite dire warnings > not to. > > Peter > >> On 15 Feb 2018, at 5:46 am, Ken Cunningham <ken.cunningham.web...@gmail.com> >> wrote: > … > >> In a recent poll >> <https://www.slant.co/versus/1588/1674/~macports_vs_homebrew>, homebrew was >> recommended 375 to 25 over MacPorts. > … >> 2. symlinks into /usr/local therefore: >> a) no adjustments needed to path >> b) no need for sudo >> c) third-party apps, libraries, and xcode projects can be downloaded and >> built or run, and the system looks there by default, so need no modification >> to build or run. > \ > > -- > Peter West > p...@pbw.id.au > “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” >
