undefined | Better HN

0 pointssmoldesu4y ago0 comments

> But stand-alone programs? Not even things like Photoshop, I'm talking something written by someone and you want to install it? That's not as compatible with the Linux method

There's definitely some room for improvement here, but fwiw you can double-click executables on Linux to run them just like you would on Windows (or to an extent, MacOS). I think the "solution" here is not to rely on portable software, and when you do need to rely on it, use a packaging format like AppImage.

> And homebrew (and anything equivalent for WSL?) works pretty well.

I hate to burst your bubble, but Homebrew is genuinely awful. The vast majority of Mac devops issues I've encountered stem from a Homebrew issue, as a matter of fact. Oh no! Software (x) isn't running on Mike's M1, but it runs just fine on Melissa's x86 machine! The problem? Homebrew installs software to different locations depending on your system architecture. That's right, the same package will end up in different places when the only difference between machines is CPU architecture. That's just one issue, I have gripes about reinstalling, leftover files, formulae syntax, Linux "compatibility", UX and more... the author isn't wrong when they say the experience simply doesn't compare to apt or pacman.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

bombcar4y ago· 2 in thread

Yeah, homebrew isn't the greatest by any means, but it seems to have more stuff and more people use it than fink or macports anymore, so usually there's a workaround somewhere.

The MacOS "app bundle" is a really cute solution to the installation/library problem, and I wish something like it had caught on in the Linux world. It seems AppImage is heading this way.

smoldesuOP4y ago

App bundles are neat, but when given the option of "an app directory on top of a traditional Unix filesystem layout" or "everything is packages", I'll tend to choose the latter. It might just be an impasse situation; I think the ideas of package management are developed about as far as they can go, even newcomers like Flatpak can't really bring anything new to the table. The only package manager that's impressed me in recent years is Nix. I think if most developers decided to throw their weight behind Nix packages, we could live in the "it just works" utopia that Linux and Mac developers alike have been dreaming of for years.

bombcar4y ago

The bane of package managers is when you have to go beyond what they supply for whatever reason - horrible memories of trying to upgrade php on old versions of CentOS still haunt me.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse