Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | 6cxs2hd6's comments login

I'm downvoting your comment because

- that seems to be copy and pasted (i.e. plagiarized) from the original blog post http://danluu.com/clwb-pcommit/

- your submission history suggests you are associated with improgrammer.net

-----


Yes, it is 100% plagiarized. The last sentence in the original text:

"It doesn’t directly address the OS overhead issue, but that can, to a large extent, be worked around without extra hardware."

Their modification:

"It doesn’t directly address the OS overhead issue, but that can, to an astronomically immense extent, be worked around without extra hardware."

-----


It looks like the original text was automatically processed by replacing various words by their synonyms from a thesaurus, leading to hilariously non-idiomatic prose.

-----


Artificial Awkwardness. It was bound to happen.

-----


Ouch, that's bad. Also, plagiarizing luu doesn't sit well around these parts. That's the home team!

-----


> If you're a landlord or hotelier,

Yes. Also: Parent of teenagers.

-----


Why is /usr/local bad advice?

-----


Because /usr/local doesn't belong to homebrew and is not appropriate for homebrew to commandeer.

MacPorts was originally written by the BSD team at Apple; if /usr/local was where a packaging system was supposed to stuff itself on OS X, they would have used it -- instead of /opt/local.

The co-opting of /use/local breaks all kinds of stuff -- for instance, /usr/local/lib is in the default linker search path and can't be removed, which means that trying to not link against homebrew libraries requires some pretty evil hacks -- such as library symbol interposing to hide /usr/local from stat(), etc.

-----


I disagree. / is where the stuff needed for single-user mode gets installed. /usr is where the OS's userland stuff gets installed. On Linux systems this includes everything that you get from your package manager, because this is considered to be part of your system. /usr/local is wher you install your own packages. For example, if I'm installing something from source, that's where I'm going to install it. Or if I'm building my own project, I would also install it there.

On a Mac, there is no system-blessed pacakage manager - the official packages are pre-installed on your Mac and only change when you get an OS update. They tend to be installed in /Library or ~/Library. All of the add-on package managers therefore play a role much closer to that of hand-installed source. It's logical that they install to /ur/local. In particular, one of my main use case for package managers is when I want to try out a package that has a whole bunch of dependencies. I might want to compile the package that interests me by hand, as I need to tweak the config, but I don't want to have to do the configure-make-make install dance for the 30 packages that it has as dependencies. That's where homebrew / MacPorts comes into the picture, they save me that work. But they should be installed into the same hierachy as the package that does interest me, as they are at the same level of "officialness".

One last thing. I know Fedora, Gentoo and MacOSX fairly well, and I have also worked a fair bit on a hand-rolled linux distribution. None of them ever had /usr/local/lib in their LD_LIBRARY_PATH by default, I've always had to configure that in my .bash_profile. This is exactly what you would expect, by default the directory should be empty, so why add it to the default LD_LIBRARY_PATH, that doesn't make any sense.

-----


> /usr/local is wher you install your own packages. For example, if I'm installing something from source, that's where I'm going to install it.

Right, that's what it's for, it's also why a 3rd party package manager shouldn't use it.

-----


Homebrew is installing stuff from source, though. It's automating the task of me doing it.

-----


Well, it usually installs from source, but that's not really the point. It's a package manager, it is trivial to give it it's own home, (and thankfully they made that an easy thing to do), but to throw it in that /usr/local bucket by default? It seems like a decision that requires real justification and the reasons I have seen seem pretty weak.

I mean, in the end it seems like almost nobody cares, but it's always been a pet peeve of mine.

-----


I get what you're saying, but /usr/local is where I install stuff. I'm happy with having the thing that does little more than untangle my dependencies before running `make` for me with sane defaults use it too.

I expect to find system-specific applications in /usr/local. I get the argument otherwise, and it has merit, but not enough to not do it, if you get me.

-----


Can I ask what you use your package manager for? My experience on the Mac is that it's mostly used by developers that want to install a package and don't want to have to manually install the 30 other dependencies by hand. For that use case, installing the dependencies along side the module that you actually wanted seems like an eminently reasonable thing to do, and certainly in my case it's pretty much exactly what I want from a package manager on the Mac. I assume if it bugs you that you have a different use case from mine. I would be interested to hear what it is (have I been missing opportunities on my Mac all this time???)

-----


> On a Mac, there is no system-blessed pacakage manager ...

Which is one very big reason why commandeering /usr/local for a single package manager is inappropriate; it means that your 3rd-party package manager cannot share the system with any other 3rd-party package manager.

To re-iterate -- the BSD team, who maintained hier(7), very intentionally didn't put MacPorts in /usr/local.

-----


There are quite a few introductions to macros. Maybe like monads, it's a topic where people need to read a few until one "clicks" for them.

Having said that, I think this is among the best. The writing style is friendly, the examples are meaningful, and it builds up in digestible steps.

-----


Yes. Also: this recent blog post claims Google is willing to remove apps that increase privacy (not just ad-blocking) in a way that undermines Google's business model: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8240450

-----


> tend to list prices inc VAT in Europe

I was under the impression it's a legal requirement to show the inc VAT price. (And, show it as the most-prominent price -- no trickery like showing exc VAT bold, and inc VAT in fine print.)

-----


I thought that too and here in Germany I'm very certain that's the case if you are selling to individuals. However when looking at the sales pages of JetBrains[1] (a czech company) they do not include VAT even for the individual developers version (which is explicitly not available to companies) so it might be that only national law applies (EU is difficult ;) )

http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/buy/choose_edition.jsp?license...

-----


Would "responded" include only actual replies, or also no-reply downvotes?

I ask because lately I'm experiencing an increasing proportion of the latter. Apparently pg has endorsed these on the grounds that they are the pure logical inverse of no-reply upvotes. Although I disagree, that's the official stance, and if it is to continue to be the reality here, I think any new notification feature ought to include those, too.

Because that way, if a comment is being downvoted, then I'd know sooner. I'd have the option of adding clarification -- just like if someone took the time to reply with an actual comment and I were to get notified.

-----


I don't even see a down vote button, I guess that is something that surfaces at a higher reputation? I agree, it would be nice to know if people are down voting your comments. I see comments becoming lighter gray, I'm guessing they are down voted? Often, I think they are fine comments in my eyes. hah.

-----


I think another difference is that the bulk of FedEx and UPS customers are businesses -- who typically are smart enough to allocate business among at least two vendors. Short-term this keeps your suppliers honest on price and service. Long-term it hopefully sustains more than 1 supplier. Even when an industry has one "gorilla" (e.g. Intel), business customers will try to sustain at least one "chimpanzee" (e.g. AMD).

However this dynamic is missing from consumer businesses.

-----


Somewhat related: Some who advocate for workplace diversity are suspicious that "culture fit" is often a dog whistle meaning something like "young white brogrammers". I believe that suspicion is justified. At the same time, this post reminds me that company culture isn't always only that. It's rewarding to look at any organization through the eyes of an anthropologist. The idea that mid-size startups are actually closer to religions than tribes, for example, is something I find especially interesting.

-----


It is disappointing that you got downvoted. Hopefully it was an accidental downvote due to HN's poor mobile browsing support, as opposed to someone being unwilling or unable to explain why they disagree with you.

-----

More

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: