[OS X TeX] iInstaller and manually installed components
bvoisin at mac.com
Tue Nov 30 02:43:01 EST 2004
Le 30 nov. 04, à 00:59, Martin Costabel a écrit :
> Peter Dyballa wrote:
>> There are strange reasons why the Fink folks think their ls, grep,
>> file, libtool, gettext, libXaw3d ... are better than the Apple
>> supplied GNU utilities.
> I know that anti-Fink FUD has always been fashionable on this list,
> even when it is not backed up by facts
It seems, from your description of the problem, that the Fink approach
is that OS X should adapt to Unix/Linux software as much as possible
(in that, for example, Fink replaces -- logically, through path
settings, not physically -- libraries and tools provided with OS X
whenever necessary so that Unix/Linux sources compile mostly
out-of-the-box on OS X), whereas the i-Installer approach is that
Unix/Linux software should adapt to OS X as much as possible (in that,
for example, i-Installer uses libraries and tools provided with OS X
whenever possible, installs its own tools and libraries so that they
become components of the local OS X setup and can be used by other
software, and adapts Unix/Linux software whenever necessary so that
they compile on an out-of-the-box OS X).
There was a similar discussion recently on the DarwinPorts list.
Quoting one post
> From a philosophical point of view ... DarwinPorts was designed so (and
> by) Mac OS X users would have easy access to Open Software; Fink was
> designed so (and by) Unix and Linux Open Software users would be able
> to run their programs on OS X. There is nothing inherently "better"
> about either approach, they are simply two different ways of
> approaching the same problem -- running Open Software on OS X.
--------------------- Info ---------------------
Mac-TeX Website: http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/
& FAQ: http://latex.yauh.de/faq/
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
List Post: <mailto:MacOSX-TeX at email.esm.psu.edu>
More information about the MacOSX-TeX