Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Dave Horsfall]

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019, Bill Cole wrote:

The one of my Macs which is most reliant on MacPorts has 2G, cannot 
handle any more, and typically runs with <100M free and 1G in 
/var/vm/swapfile* files. The fallback positions there are NetBSD or a 
trash can, not a VM.


Mine (an early MacBook) is maxed out to 4GB; I understand that it *may* 
take 8GB third-party SIMMs, but the firmware *may* need to be flashed to 
pretend that it's a MacBook Pro, which *may* break things.


The thing won't even run High Sierra (it failed twice, for different
reasons) anyway.

Guess what I'm *not* going to do? :-)

-- Dave

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[j...@tigger.ws]

> On 21 Feb 2019, at 8:00 pm, macports-users-requ...@lists.macports.org wrote:
> 
> For me. My usage is atypical. If a 2GB Linux VM works for you as a 
> replacement for MacPorts, that's great.

Bill not for a heart beat would I suggest replacing mac ports with a VM. 
I was opining that using a VM is better/nicer/whatever than installing linux 
natively on your mac.
I read that Linus Tolvards uses a mac (natach running linux) as his machine. 
Doing so might be nice idealogically but until apple overwhelms with things 
like SIP osx uses the hardware better,

James

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Bill Cole]

On 20 Feb 2019, at 18:56, James Linder wrote:

On 20 Feb 2019, at 8:00 pm, macports-users-requ...@lists.macports.org 
wrote:



So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”


Because running the tools it provides in a VM is a grotesque waste of
RAM and disk space and puts a wall up between tools I want to use
occasionally and the UI where I prefer to work mostly.


Bill I disagree! What is a waste? I typically give my VMs 2G from a 
32G pool. I run 2 or 3 VMs without noticeing.


The one of my Macs which is most reliant on MacPorts has 2G, cannot 
handle any more, and typically runs with <100M free and 1G in 
/var/vm/swapfile* files. The fallback positions there are NetBSD or a 
trash can, not a VM.


The two Macs that I regularly use as personal machines both could handle 
a permanent 2G (or even 4G) VM at the cost of using the fancy tricks of 
macOS memory management. However, I rely on using tools managed by 
MacPorts often enough on those machines that I'd need a permanently 
running VM holding on to a big gob of memory that macOS would otherwise 
be using as fs cache or to avoid compressing other processes' memory or 
purging purgeable pages. Nearly everything I manage with MacPorts on the 
machines that could handle a big VM is something I use for a few seconds 
(or milliseconds) at a time, perhaps a few dozen times per hour all day 
long or a few times per day. So 99.9% of the time, that big VM's memory 
would be used for nothing but keeping an idle VM in existence. That's a 
waste as I see it.


And that doesn't even touch on the extra friction that would be added to 
how I work.



You *can* get apple ram from not-apple that is quite cheap.


I've been topping up Macs with aftermarket RAM since the limits were 
measured in MB...


My Macs typically manage to utilize all but a few hundred MB of their 
RAM, so setting aside substantial amounts to mostly do nothing is 
pointless, and since at this point the only one of my 6 machines not 
maxed out would set me back $600 to take from 32G to 64G, the existence 
of "cheap" RAM isn't really relevant. I use tools from MacPorts on the 
best-performing and biggest machines that are available to me for 
arbitrary use, and a VM carved out from those machines just to replace 
MacPorts would be silly.


For me. My usage is atypical. If a 2GB Linux VM works for you as a 
replacement for MacPorts, that's great.


--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Available For Hire: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[James Linder]

> On 20 Feb 2019, at 8:00 pm, macports-users-requ...@lists.macports.org wrote:
> 
>> So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”
> 
> Because running the tools it provides in a VM is a grotesque waste of 
> RAM and disk space and puts a wall up between tools I want to use 
> occasionally and the UI where I prefer to work mostly.

Bill I disagree! What is a waste? I typically give my VMs 2G from a 32G pool. I 
run 2 or 3 VMs without noticeing. You *can* get apple ram from not-apple that 
is quite cheap.

> Also, on one old 1st generation Core Duo iMac, it helps me to build and 
> run a suite of server software and other key tools that can face the 
> Internet with reasonable safety

A couple of years ago one of the anti-virus companies offered $10 000 and a 
Sony Viao to the first person to hack their honeypot Windows, Max and Linux 
boxes.
The Windows reward was claimed within hours
The Mac was hacked in a week (a flaw in safari)
The linux prize is still unclaimed.
Detractors opined that ir was unkewl (sic) to hack linux.
Rubbish! It would be very kewl to be the one who found an exploitable flaw in 
linux.

Yesterday News: Canberra parliment in massive hack. Makes you wonder.

> and an attack surface that doesn't quite 
> look like any other machine while seeming irresistible to a certain 
> class of miscreants. I have a professional interest in the unique 
> behavioral intelligence I get from that machine that I cannot get 
> anywhere else. It would be a serious chore to maintain that host as 
> 'live bait' without MacPorts and I hate the idea of just discarding a 
> machine that would otherwise have no practical use.

I guess the subject is dear to my heart that explains me waxing (so) lyrical.
James

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[James Linder]

> On 20 Feb 2019, at 8:00 pm, macports-users-requ...@lists.macports.org wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”. 
>> 
>> Same reason as always: to help you install software on your Mac. If
>> you prefer installing software in a VM running a different OS, by all
>> means do so, but it's not the same thing.
> 
> Another philosophical question you might want to ask
> yourself is "Why macOS these days?" That's only a bit
> facetious (a large bit, admittedly). If you mostly use
> a VM, you might be better off just installing that OS
> on the hardware and replacing macOS. Just a thought.

I’ve tried linux on my iMac27.
While it works, Apple for all their faults do a much better job of managing the 
hardware:
Bluetooth pre boot.
MacOS fiddles the sound to make it ‘sound’ nice, on linux it is tinny.
MacOS sleeps the unused cpu cores, linux throttles them. The linux way runs 
much hotter.
I use MS word occasionally. MS in their anti-linux mode don’t do a Word. I use 
CrossOver but a native toolset is noticeably nicer.
I sat my wife, as a totally naive user in front of Word and OpenOffice and she 
quickly gravitated one way. I have  to accept that being a borg does not stop 
ypu writing nice software.
If you use a touch pad the MacOS gestures are much better managed than linux 
making a VM attractive,
There is a whole world I have not explored using a VM app in a native window. 
(think it is called seamless mode on VirtualBox)

> The only reason I use macos at all is because it's
> unixy. I spend most of my time in full screen X11 using
> many programs and languages from macports.

I assume that the general anti-X11 rant comes from people who have no idea! The 
whole wayland push fills me with dread. I use multiple computers, usually from 
one seat. (X11 lets you do that) for all the Mac stuff I resorted to nomachine. 
Thats a poor subsitute.
Again much of macports let you choose X11.

> Even without
> X11, macports makes it easy to install and upgrade lots
> of software that would otherwise be cumbersome to
> install individually, let alone keep up to date. I
> wasn't even aware that Apple supported macports. Apple
> doesn't really support X11 like it used to either and
> it doesn't work quite as well as it does under Linux
> but it'll do.
> 
>> From my point of view, macports makes it possible to
> keep using macOS. Without it, Linux in a VM or
> replacing macOS altogether would be hard to resist.

James

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Bill Cole]

On 20 Feb 2019, at 16:23, Alejandro Imass wrote:

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:48 AM Mojca Miklavec  
wrote:



On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:33, Bill Cole wrote:


The departure of MacPorts from Mac OS Forge as it was
being wound down was announced in


https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2016-August/033405.html

While I wouldn't mind if Apple continued to provide hardware building
capacity, the move to GitHub probably saved (and boosted) the 
project.



Exactly my point. There is no such "abandonment" from Apple to 
MacPorts, or

any Open Source projects around macOS or anything like that.


In fact there has been. There is no longer a functioning syslog(3) 
subsystem on macOS. This causes substantial difficulties for otherwise 
portable server software, as shown by the recent addition of an internal 
logging subsystem for Postfix. They have also ceased development and 
packaging of the customized versions of many open source tools which 
were formerly part of the Server.app bundle. The increasingly 
restrictive defaults of SIP, sandboxing, code-signing, and a preference 
App Store software are all OSS-hostile, even if that's not their main 
intent.


Whether or not you consider a trend that has been running for ~4 years 
"recent" or not is a subjective judgment. Apple substantially supported 
MacPorts and the other Mac OS Forge projects for 10 years, which ended 
less than 3 years ago.


--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Available For Hire: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Alejandro Imass]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:48 AM Mojca Miklavec  wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:33, Bill Cole wrote:
> >
> > The departure of MacPorts from Mac OS Forge as it was
> > being wound down was announced in
> >
> https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2016-August/033405.html
>
> While I wouldn't mind if Apple continued to provide hardware building
> capacity, the move to GitHub probably saved (and boosted) the project.
>
>
Exactly my point. There is no such "abandonment" from Apple to MacPorts, or
any Open Source projects around macOS or anything like that.

As I understood in the initial posting, the OP was implying that somehow
Apple was departing from supporting MacPorts (and by transitivity Homebrew)
and I don't think that is accurate.

The two references mentioned so far, namely:

1) The MacPorts History
2) The departure of MacPorts from Mac OS Forge [to GitHub]

are not new history nor do they reflect any radical changes in Apple's
attitude or support for MacPorts or OSS in general. IMHO, anyway.

So the sentence in the original post "Recently, given the overall Apple
direction for MacOS" is misleading because there is no such recently nor
there is any change in Apple's direction towards MacPorts, Homebrew,
XQuartz or any other interfacing with the OSS world. If there are pls.
point to them.

On the contrary, I think they've always had a pretty clear cut relationship
with OSS and participate and/or maintain in hundreds of OSS described here:
https://opensource.apple.com and here:
https://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

best,

-- 

Alex



> Mojca
>

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Dave Horsfall]

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, Mojca Miklavec wrote:

I would have left macOS if I didn't have a package manager available, 
the computer would be next-to-useless.


I'm probably not the only one here who remembers the days when you got 
your software from comp.sources and figured out how to make it go :-)


Even if the software is not packaged (yet), it is orders of magnitude 
easier to build it for Mac than without the package manager.


I find FreeBSD to be comparable; trouble is, there are now several such 
managers (all incompatible, of course)...  And I'm still trying to come to 
grips with Linux (Debian) and apt-get/aptitude/etc.


-- Dave

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[William Santos via macports-users]

I agree, the project is strong. Apple providing a server was nice, but 
certainly not  a necessity. GitHub is great!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 20, 2019, at 7:47 AM, Mojca Miklavec  wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:33, Bill Cole wrote:
>> 
>> The departure of MacPorts from Mac OS Forge as it was
>> being wound down was announced in
>> https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2016-August/033405.html
> 
> While I wouldn't mind if Apple continued to provide hardware building
> capacity, the move to GitHub probably saved (and boosted) the project.
> 
> Mojca

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Mojca Miklavec]

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:33, Bill Cole wrote:
>
> The departure of MacPorts from Mac OS Forge as it was
> being wound down was announced in
> https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2016-August/033405.html

While I wouldn't mind if Apple continued to provide hardware building
capacity, the move to GitHub probably saved (and boosted) the project.

Mojca

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Bill Cole]

On 20 Feb 2019, at 10:10, Alejandro Imass wrote:


On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 8:13 AM S. L. Garwood via macports-users <
macports-users@lists.macports.org> wrote:


First let me say I have used MacPorts since 10.6.8.

[...]


I appreciate all the work the developers have put into MacPorts but 
to me
the handwriting on the wall was when Apple pulled the MacPorts 
informal

support they provided for years.



Not sure what this means. What do you mean informal support, when did 
they

provide such support and when did they pull it?


It was actually pretty formal...

From 2006 through 2016, Apple hosted an umbrella site for some key open 
source projects called "Mac OS Forge" which has a tombstone page at 
macosforge.org. The departure of MacPorts from Mac OS Forge as it was 
being wound down was announced in 
https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2016-August/033405.html



--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Available For Hire: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Alejandro Imass]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 8:13 AM S. L. Garwood via macports-users <
macports-users@lists.macports.org> wrote:

> First let me say I have used MacPorts since 10.6.8.
>
> [...]

> I appreciate all the work the developers have put into MacPorts but to me
> the handwriting on the wall was when Apple pulled the MacPorts informal
> support they provided for years.
>

Not sure what this means. What do you mean informal support, when did they
provide such support and when did they pull it?



>

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Christoph Kukulies]

> Am 20.02.2019 um 14:50 schrieb S. L. Garwood via macports-users 
> :
> 
> A big thank you to all the people who chimed in and gave me much to think 
> over.
> I have used MacPorts since 10.6.8 - it is based on one of my favorite package 
> managers (FreeBSD ports)
> I’ve been a long time FreeBSD user, fan, and booster (since 386-bsd believe 
> it or not).

OT:


Yeah, 386bsd , Bill Jolitz.

and his mantra lying in this verse:

…

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

(The Road Not Taken - Robert Frost)


—
Christoph

Also a long time FreeBSD user.
> I think for now I’ll keep using MacPorts (in spite of not having boost-1.68) 
> and move off of Linux to a FreeBSD VM for *nix needs.
> I am NOT a big fan of systemd so FreeBSD is a no brainer.
> Again thanks to all for your comments and suggestions.
> 
>> On Feb 20, 2019, at 8:14 AM, Mojca Miklavec  wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 14:13, S. L. Garwood via macports-users wrote:
>>> 
>>> So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”.
>> 
>> If your question is: "Why a package manager for Mac these days", just
>> a few numbers.
>> 
>> We don't have any good analytics data, but our competitor saw more
>> than 6 million installs (not counting those who opted out) of the most
>> popular package in the last year. This at least tells you that there
>> is interest in people using a native package manager. I know that our
>> traffic runs in many terrabytes, but I forgot even the sample numbers.
>> 
>> If you don't care about running your software natively, it's better to
>> switch to Linux and forget about the expensive hardware.
>> 
>> I would have left macOS if I didn't have a package manager available,
>> the computer would be next-to-useless.
>> Even if the software is not packaged (yet), it is orders of magnitude
>> easier to build it for Mac than without the package manager.
>> 
>> Mojca
>> 
>> 
>> Mojca
> 

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Richard DeLaurell]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 7:15 AM Mojca Miklavec  wrote:

>
> I would have left macOS if I didn't have a package manager available,
> the computer would be next-to-useless.


Speaking as an ordinary end-user I agree with that; if not for macports I’d
be even more tempted to switch to FreeBSD myself.

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[James Linder]

> On 20 Feb 2019, at 8:00 pm, macports-users-requ...@lists.macports.org wrote:
> 
> First let me say I have used MacPorts since 10.6.8.
> 
> Recently, given the overall Apple direction for MacOS I stopped and asked 
> myself “Why am I doing this?”.
> I started using Mint Linux on VirtualBox and ported a couple of the simpler 
> apps I use.
> Mint has come a long way and runs very well on a VBox instance. Data can move 
> easily from MacOS to Mint and vice-versa.
> True, I have been a *nix user for decades, but a novice (non-*nix user) 
> wouldn’t be using MacPorts anyway.
> 
> I appreciate all the work the developers have put into MacPorts but to me the 
> handwriting on the wall was when Apple pulled the MacPorts informal support 
> they provided for years.
> So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”. 

I wonder if I’ll tread on toes: In order to seamlessly drain all your money 
Apple need to make nice hardware that works well. They do. I run a doz or so 
linux VMs, yet having macports provide many of the daily tools I use is 
incredibly useful.

James

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[S. L. Garwood via macports-users]

A big thank you to all the people who chimed in and gave me much to think over.
I have used MacPorts since 10.6.8 - it is based on one of my favorite package 
managers (FreeBSD ports)
I’ve been a long time FreeBSD user, fan, and booster (since 386-bsd believe it 
or not).
I think for now I’ll keep using MacPorts (in spite of not having boost-1.68) 
and move off of Linux to a FreeBSD VM for *nix needs.
I am NOT a big fan of systemd so FreeBSD is a no brainer.
Again thanks to all for your comments and suggestions.

> On Feb 20, 2019, at 8:14 AM, Mojca Miklavec  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 14:13, S. L. Garwood via macports-users wrote:
>> 
>> So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”.
> 
> If your question is: "Why a package manager for Mac these days", just
> a few numbers.
> 
> We don't have any good analytics data, but our competitor saw more
> than 6 million installs (not counting those who opted out) of the most
> popular package in the last year. This at least tells you that there
> is interest in people using a native package manager. I know that our
> traffic runs in many terrabytes, but I forgot even the sample numbers.
> 
> If you don't care about running your software natively, it's better to
> switch to Linux and forget about the expensive hardware.
> 
> I would have left macOS if I didn't have a package manager available,
> the computer would be next-to-useless.
> Even if the software is not packaged (yet), it is orders of magnitude
> easier to build it for Mac than without the package manager.
> 
> Mojca
> 
> 
> Mojca

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Mojca Miklavec]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 14:13, S. L. Garwood via macports-users wrote:
>
> So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”.

If your question is: "Why a package manager for Mac these days", just
a few numbers.

We don't have any good analytics data, but our competitor saw more
than 6 million installs (not counting those who opted out) of the most
popular package in the last year. This at least tells you that there
is interest in people using a native package manager. I know that our
traffic runs in many terrabytes, but I forgot even the sample numbers.

If you don't care about running your software natively, it's better to
switch to Linux and forget about the expensive hardware.

I would have left macOS if I didn't have a package manager available,
the computer would be next-to-useless.
Even if the software is not packaged (yet), it is orders of magnitude
easier to build it for Mac than without the package manager.

Mojca


Mojca

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Ruben Di Battista]

To complement people answer, and most of all, "Why macOS"? Well, because
there is not another Unix laptop that is as efficiently implemented. For
example, take a Windows laptop, put Linux on it, and see your battery life
drop at least of 15-20%. Well, i hate it. On my macOS I have very good
battery life with basically 99% of Linux software compiled with the help of
MacPorts.

Using a VM workflow is really a no-go for me. So laggy and time consuming.
And really, macOS is really beautiful to use and agile. The gestures are
really time saving and they're already there without pindaric flights among
Windows Managers bugs and configurations on Linux (I could achieve
something similarly agile with ArchLinux + KDE Plasma 5, but I needed to
tweak quite a lot)


On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:28 AM Riccardo Mottola via macports-users <
macports-users@lists.macports.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Bill Cole wrote:
> > Because running the tools it provides in a VM is a grotesque waste of
> > RAM and disk space and puts a wall up between tools I want to use
> > occasionally and the UI where I prefer to work mostly.
>
> I second that, for me a VM is a waste and only the "last possible mean".
> Except of course if you need VM to have many different environments and
> don't want to have a multi-boot or a multi-machine setup.
>
> >
> > Also, on one old 1st generation Core Duo iMac, it helps me to build
> > and run a suite of server software and other key tools that can face
> > the Internet with reasonable safety and an attack surface that doesn't
> > quite look like any other machine while seeming irresistible to a
> > certain class of miscreants. I have a professional interest in the
> > unique behavioral intelligence I get from that machine that I cannot
> > get anywhere else. It would be a serious chore to maintain that host
> > as 'live bait' without MacPorts and I hate the idea of just discarding
> > a machine that would otherwise have no practical use.
>
> Right, MacPorts provides also an excellent way for having older Macs
> running, since it allows to get current software compiled for your
> system when perhaps a binary is not provided, to get updated
> dependencies, etc.
> Having e.g. gcc 6.5 and clang on Leopard or Snow Leopard is jsut
> excellent and can be both your goal (if you want to develop) or a tool
> to geto other applications you need.
> So are up-to-date svn and git clients!
>
> Using Gimp natively is just nice, isn't it?
>
> Riccardo
>


-- 
  _
-. .´  |
  ',  ;|∞∞
˜˜ |∞ RdB
,.,|∞∞
  .'   '.  |
-'   `'
https://rdb.is 

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Riccardo Mottola via macports-users]

Hi,

Bill Cole wrote:
Because running the tools it provides in a VM is a grotesque waste of 
RAM and disk space and puts a wall up between tools I want to use 
occasionally and the UI where I prefer to work mostly.


I second that, for me a VM is a waste and only the "last possible mean". 
Except of course if you need VM to have many different environments and 
don't want to have a multi-boot or a multi-machine setup.




Also, on one old 1st generation Core Duo iMac, it helps me to build 
and run a suite of server software and other key tools that can face 
the Internet with reasonable safety and an attack surface that doesn't 
quite look like any other machine while seeming irresistible to a 
certain class of miscreants. I have a professional interest in the 
unique behavioral intelligence I get from that machine that I cannot 
get anywhere else. It would be a serious chore to maintain that host 
as 'live bait' without MacPorts and I hate the idea of just discarding 
a machine that would otherwise have no practical use.


Right, MacPorts provides also an excellent way for having older Macs 
running, since it allows to get current software compiled for your 
system when perhaps a binary is not provided, to get updated 
dependencies, etc.
Having e.g. gcc 6.5 and clang on Leopard or Snow Leopard is jsut 
excellent and can be both your goal (if you want to develop) or a tool 
to geto other applications you need.

So are up-to-date svn and git clients!

Using Gimp natively is just nice, isn't it?

Riccardo

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Bill Cole]

On 19 Feb 2019, at 8:13, S. L. Garwood via macports-users wrote:


So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”


Because running the tools it provides in a VM is a grotesque waste of 
RAM and disk space and puts a wall up between tools I want to use 
occasionally and the UI where I prefer to work mostly.


Also, on one old 1st generation Core Duo iMac, it helps me to build and 
run a suite of server software and other key tools that can face the 
Internet with reasonable safety and an attack surface that doesn't quite 
look like any other machine while seeming irresistible to a certain 
class of miscreants. I have a professional interest in the unique 
behavioral intelligence I get from that machine that I cannot get 
anywhere else. It would be a serious chore to maintain that host as 
'live bait' without MacPorts and I hate the idea of just discarding a 
machine that would otherwise have no practical use.


--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Available For Hire: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Dave Horsfall]

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, macpo...@raf.org wrote:

The only reason I use macos at all is because it's unixy. I spend most 
of my time in full screen X11 using many programs and languages from 
macports. Even without X11, macports makes it easy to install and 
upgrade lots of software that would otherwise be cumbersome to install 
individually, let alone keep up to date. I wasn't even aware that Apple 
supported macports. Apple doesn't really support X11 like it used to 
either and it doesn't work quite as well as it does under Linux but 
it'll do.


Which is pretty much what I do; to me, it's just another Unix box with 
windows (no, not that one) on it, and I get to use my favourite tools 
without stuffing around inside a Gooey.


It's also a porting platform, along with FreeBSD and Debian.

-- Dave

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[macports]

Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> On Feb 19, 2019, at 07:13, S. L. Garwood wrote:
> 
> > So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”. 
> 
> Same reason as always: to help you install software on your Mac. If
> you prefer installing software in a VM running a different OS, by all
> means do so, but it's not the same thing.

Another philosophical question you might want to ask
yourself is "Why macOS these days?" That's only a bit
facetious (a large bit, admittedly). If you mostly use
a VM, you might be better off just installing that OS
on the hardware and replacing macOS. Just a thought.

The only reason I use macos at all is because it's
unixy. I spend most of my time in full screen X11 using
many programs and languages from macports. Even without
X11, macports makes it easy to install and upgrade lots
of software that would otherwise be cumbersome to
install individually, let alone keep up to date. I
wasn't even aware that Apple supported macports. Apple
doesn't really support X11 like it used to either and
it doesn't work quite as well as it does under Linux
but it'll do.

>From my point of view, macports makes it possible to
keep using macOS. Without it, Linux in a VM or
replacing macOS altogether would be hard to resist.

cheers,
raf

Re: A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Feb 19, 2019, at 07:13, S. L. Garwood wrote:

> So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”. 

Same reason as always: to help you install software on your Mac. If you prefer 
installing software in a VM running a different OS, by all means do so, but 
it's not the same thing.

A general philosophical question about MacPorts

[S. L. Garwood via macports-users]

First let me say I have used MacPorts since 10.6.8.

Recently, given the overall Apple direction for MacOS I stopped and asked 
myself “Why am I doing this?”.
I started using Mint Linux on VirtualBox and ported a couple of the simpler 
apps I use.
Mint has come a long way and runs very well on a VBox instance. Data can move 
easily from MacOS to Mint and vice-versa.
True, I have been a *nix user for decades, but a novice (non-*nix user) 
wouldn’t be using MacPorts anyway.

I appreciate all the work the developers have put into MacPorts but to me the 
handwriting on the wall was when Apple pulled the MacPorts informal support 
they provided for years.
So my philosophical question is “Why MacPorts these days?”.