Re: OS X packaging is an embarrassment

[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/05/21]

From: peter (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: OS X packaging is an embarrassment
Date: 20:25 on 21 May 2006
> Sure, just like an *nix or whatever; but you don't know why it's that way,
> and you don't know if that's correct.

In UNIX a typical package involves having files in 10 different obscurely
named directories, with names like "/usr/sbin" that are STILL the subject
of active debate over whetehr something should be "sbin" or "libexec".

In OS X a typical package involves having one directory tree sitting
in any convenient folder.

This is a HUGE difference.

It's why the lack of a heavy duty package system is an annoyance, not a
hate. If it was built out of packages like a Linux distro that would be
different.

> How can I ask my Mac if a given package is installed correctly?  Oh, right,
> I can't.

A properly designed package can't be improperly installed. Really. The
package is the installation, there's nothing else to see.

> It's got nothing to do with Linux; it's got to do with the OS being able to
> answer straightforward questions like, "Are you configured correctly?".

Erm... what? I know it can answer the question "what packages do you have
installed", but that's a long way from "are you configured correctly".

Generated at 14:00 on 27 May 2006 by mariachi 0.52