[Pythonmac-SIG] fink vs DarwinPorts?

[Bob Ippolito]

On Feb 5, 2005, at 6:27 AM, Michael Twomey wrote:

> On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 11:57:01 +0100, Piet van Oostrum <piet at cs.uu.nl> 
> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Brett C." <bac at OCF.Berkeley.EDU> (BC) wrote:
>>
>>> BC> Russell E. Owen wrote:
>>>>> I've seen a lot of discussion lately about fink and darwinports 
>>>>> and I'm
>>>>> wondering if folks who have experience with either can comment on 
>>>>> their
>>>>> relative merits?
>>>>>
>>
>>> BC> I personally have run Fink in the past multiple times and always 
>>> end up
>>> BC> deleting it in the end.  DarwinPorts, on the other hand, I have 
>>> yet to
>>> BC> uninstall.  The package config files are easy to read by eye (it 
>>> is
>>> BC> basically Tcl code).  I also just like how the system is set up 
>>> using the
>>> BC> command line; never liked how Fink works that way.
>>
>>> BC> And their idea of activation (can have multiple installs of the 
>>> same thing
>>> BC> with different configs; just activate to choose which one to 
>>> use) is nice.
>>> BC> Plus having Jordan Hubbard on the team is nice (former member of 
>>> FreeBSD
>>> BC> who now works at Apple for those who don't know).  =)
>>
>> I just removed fink from my system and am reinstalling the things 
>> that I
>> need with darwinports (most of it, some things I still have manually
>> installed). Fink invades your system and it wants to install all 
>> kinds of
>> things that I don't want such as other python versions. Darwinports 
>> is less
>> invading. However, darwinports doesn't always state all dependencies 
>> which
>> means you might have to be a bit more careful. By the way, I install
>> darwinports in /usr/local because I don't want yet another directory 
>> tree.
>>
>> There are still traces of /sw/lib in my installed software but once 
>> these
>> are used they fail. I am working on finding all traces and removing 
>> them.
> Funny, I generally prefer fink precisely because it uses /sw. It keeps
> itself neatly inside /sw (source, intermediate build, final
> installation). For a unix head like myself I couldn't ask any more. I
> generally dislike a packaging system using /usr/local instead of their
> own prefix, as it is almost gauranteed to tread on other self compiled
> apps (or downloaded apps). /usr/local is meant to be for sys admins
> local installs of apps, a strong packaging system should use another
> prefix.

Dawinports uses /opt/local, not /usr/local.  It was Piet's *choice* to 
install to /usr/local (though, like you, I would never ever do that).

The BIGGEST problem with fink is that it pollutes your environment if 
you want to use it.  It expects you to have a whole script's worth of 
evil inside your shell at all times.

> Another reason is that it is based on the debian apt packaging system,
> so you have a very controlled build environment. Their .info package
> descriptions are succint and it is easy to roll your own packages.

Controlled?!  By who?  Certainly not the user.

-bob