up vote 32 down vote favorite
9
share [g+] share [fb]

On my Mac OS X machine, how would you recommend I install various software that's been ported from Linux? I don't install such software very frequently, but I've been using MacPorts and it always seems quite slow, presumably because it has to compile the packages on-the-fly.

I'd much prefer a package management system that has binary packages, saving me the need to compile things every time I want to download something new. I think Fink has binaries for some of the packages, but I usually see MacPorts recommended as the system to use.

Which do you think works better and why? (Or is there another system that I haven't heard of?)

link|improve this question
57% accept rate
1  
Good question — I was just wondering about the same thing myself. – Jonik Aug 29 '09 at 12:27
Updated my answer with a new tool that I heard about last night that looks promising. – jtimberman Aug 31 '09 at 13:45
1  
I already added an answer about it myself. :P – Ben Alpert Aug 31 '09 at 18:04
feedback

5 Answers

up vote 23 down vote accepted

I used to use Macports because:

  • It is generally more up to date
  • Macports seems to be more common / popular
  • Everyone else I work with uses it

When I did my own research on this topic when I got my MBP last fall, Macports seemed to be most commonly recommended for reason #1 above, hence reason #2 (and probably reason #3).

Compiling every package doesn't bother me. It is usually fast enough that it doesn't interfere with work. But you might look into port binaries if you're going to use macports.

However, I quit using Macports.

There is also a new tool in this space called Homebrew. I switched from Macports to Homebrew a few weeks ago and I'm pleased as punch. I like:

  • It doesn't install duplicate libraries - it uses the system's existing libs.
  • It installs in the user home directory - no sudo required and backs up to TimeMachine.

Homebrew works on Leopard or Snow Leopard, though sometimes Formulas need to be modified on Leopard.

I think all my coworkers have now switched to Homebrew. It is also gaining traction in the Ruby and Erlang (and possibly other OSS?) communities.

link|improve this answer
3  
re Homebrew not duplicating libraries - I would read whay Macports uses its own copies trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ#ownlibs – Mark Sep 16 '09 at 9:31
Regarding Homebrew, this was also interesting: superuser.com/questions/118384/… – Jonik Mar 11 '10 at 6:39
The link for Homebrew is now a 404. Perhaps this is the new correct link: mxcl.github.com/homebrew ? – Stefan Lasiewski Jun 4 '10 at 17:58
Thanks Stefan, fixed the link. – jtimberman Jun 5 '10 at 14:37
Hmmm, I guess that mxcl.github.com/homebrew proposed @Stefan is a better link? Anyway, Homebrew is nice indeed. – Arjan Jun 5 '10 at 15:30
show 1 more comment
feedback
up vote 11 down vote

You don't have to pick between the two.

MacPorts installs software to /opt/local. Fink installs to /sw.

Both leave the Darwin base system untouched, and the two can co-exist peacefully.

Fink's binary packages are great, but they aren't always up-to-date. I tend to use Fink when they've got an up-to-date package, and I build from MacPorts if they don't.

Some packages are only on one or the other, so it's handy to have them both at the ready.

link|improve this answer
1  
But still, my question remains. You don't provide any rhyme or reason as to which I should use in which situations. – Ben Alpert Aug 24 '09 at 3:19
1  
I'm guessing you posted this comment before I posted my revision. – Legion Aug 24 '09 at 3:22
1  
@Ben: How does the question remain? Legion gave the pros and cons of both the options so you can make an education decision. What else is he supposed to do, decide for you? – David Pearce Aug 24 '09 at 4:12
2  
How do you handle dependencies? If fink package A and MacPorts package B both depend on libThing do you end up with two versions of libThing (one from each package manager)? – dmckee Aug 24 '09 at 4:33
1  
joshhunt: When I posted the comment, only the first three lines of his answer were there; he added the other two after I commented. – Ben Alpert Aug 26 '09 at 3:27
feedback
up vote 5 down vote

I just found http://github.com/mxcl/homebrew, which I may consider using, just to see how well it works and because I'm up for new ideas!

link|improve this answer
I'm seriously considering blowing away /opt/local (i.e., MacPorts) in order to try Homebrew. It certainly looks promising. – Telemachus Sep 13 '09 at 21:56
That link seems to be broken now. Homebrew still looks very nice today, and I'm also getting tired of macports slowness. It's not slow just because it compiles on runtime, but also because it gets way too many dependencies that are not even real ones. – Cawas Apr 15 '10 at 22:31
feedback
up vote 4 down vote

Fink partisan here, because

  • The packages of interest to particle physicists (like me!) are very up-to-date
  • I use debian on my linux boxes. The fink command line is a lot like aptitude, and I'm used to the dpkg underpinnings
link|improve this answer
feedback
up vote 3 down vote

If you only install a few programs, anything (fink, macports, homebrew) will be fine.

But if you are a heavy user, I think only macports is suitable. fink's package is a bit too old. homebrew is a too young project.

Also, recently I've heard someone using pkgsrc on mac os x. And I may give pkgsrc a try. (I am using macports now, and have 418 ports installed currently.)

link|improve this answer
1  
With "fink's package is a bit too old", do you mean fink is too old, or the package*s* provided by fink are too old? – Andrew Grimm Jan 9 '10 at 0:42
feedback

protected by nhinkle♦ Jul 25 '11 at 2:38

This question is protected to prevent "thanks!", "me too!", or spam answers by new users. To answer it, you must have earned at least 10 reputation on this site.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.