Re: fink or no fink
Re: fink or no fink
- Subject: Re: fink or no fink
- From: Benjamin Reed <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 10:48:24 -0500
On Wednesday, February 12, 2003, at 09:06 AM, Jeff Jolley wrote:
I just like knowing that I've built the software for my machine and
that I (probably) don't have library inconsistencies and such. But
maybe w/ OSX+X11 it's not as simple as "./configure", see what's
missing, build that source (maybe build a dependancy for the
dependancy), "./configure ; make ; make install". Gimp WAS a pain to
build.
Yeah, OSX doesn't yet have parity with linux as far as the likelyhood
of something building out of the box. That's why fink exists.
I know that fink is basically dpkg and apt-get. I've never used a
debian-based linux, just mandrake (rpm-based). I know that RPM has a
problem knowing if you've installed something manually, rpm doesn't
know about it.
Fink is much like an rpm- or deb-based linux distribution, it expects
to know about your dependencies through the package database. It's not
very forgiving of things installed manually.
Does apt-get/fink work in a way that will see what I manually build?
Or will it just blindly download it's version of glib-2.2.1, force the
install, then install the other package I want?
Have you looked at darwinports? It sounds more like what you're
looking for. Basic installation management (but building from source),
and the ability to find things outside of it's perview within reason.
http://www.opendarwin.org/
As much as I like Fink, it doesn't sound like what you're looking for.
_______________________________________________
x11-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/x11-users
X11 for Mac OS X FAQ: http://developer.apple.com/qa/qa2001/qa1232.html
Report issues, request features, feedback: http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.