> Macports is an okay solution for package management.
People give macports a hard time, but I've never been sure why. It does binary or source distribution. It finds and fixes broken library linkage after upgrades. You can prune your install tree easily with the leaves target. All the functions are under one command, and it comes with a clear and concise manpage. I've used ports, pkgsrc, apt and rpm, and am generally very happy with macports in comparison, especially since default binary installs..
Anyway, I'm not trying to start an argument or anything - your opinion is your opinion. Besides, even if OS X users don't like macports for package management they can always use homebrew (or fink, I guess).
People give macports a hard time, but I've never been sure why. It does binary or source distribution. It finds and fixes broken library linkage after upgrades. You can prune your install tree easily with the leaves target. All the functions are under one command, and it comes with a clear and concise manpage. I've used ports, pkgsrc, apt and rpm, and am generally very happy with macports in comparison, especially since default binary installs..
Anyway, I'm not trying to start an argument or anything - your opinion is your opinion. Besides, even if OS X users don't like macports for package management they can always use homebrew (or fink, I guess).