El Capitan and Homebrew

Re:El Capitan and Homebrew by OJFord on Thursday October 01, 2015 @12:19PM (#10312252)

    >  it should follow common unix standards

Isn't /usr/local?

    > or at least fit in with OSX

It did - before now /usr/local was available unprivileged with ownership.

    > rather than require a hack

It only needs that now, since requirements to "fit in with OSX" have changed. That's not Homebrew's fault - they need a fast solution. Kudos in my book for responding before it's a problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:El Capitan and Homebrew by tptacek on Thursday October 01, 2015 @12:47PM (#10312527)

No, /usr/local is normally 755 root:root (or whatever the effective equivalent is). Homebrew wants it to be 775 root:admin, so that users with the admin bit can write to it. That's not standard.

People keep writing here as if El Cap removes /usr/local entirely. It does not. /usr/local is there by default. You only have to go into recovery mode if you've somehow removed it yourself.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:El Capitan and Homebrew by quesera on Thursday October 01, 2015 @01:09PM (#10312689)

> Homebrew wants it to be 775 root:admin

It's worse than that. Homebrew wants 775 $(whoami):admin.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:El Capitan and Homebrew by mzs on Thursday October 01, 2015 @02:39PM (#10313536)

quesera's reply points-out just how bad it is, but even for just 775 root:admin I would have to use sudo (plus edit the sudoers or /usr/bin/login -p first) anyway:

  $ /usr/bin/env -i /bin/sh -c \
    'id | grep -lw admin >/dev/null && echo admin || echo non-admin'
  non-admin

The problem is I have no problem using sudo, but homebrew does (like it wants make all to happen as me).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:El Capitan and Homebrew by OJFord on Thursday October 01, 2015 @03:48PM (#10314137)

Yeah, the more I read this thread, the more I'm thinking "why is that?" - `apt-get` et al have no problem with you using sudo, why does `brew` scare you into an alternative? 'because Mac'?

[ Parent | on HN ]