1. 13

From the blurb:

m-cli differs from other mac command line tools in that:

  • Its main purpose is to manage administrative tasks and do it easier
  • It doesn’t install 3rd party tools because it doesn’t have dependencies
  • The installation is very easy and doesn’t require intervention
  • It only uses OS X commands
  1.  

  2. 7

    While the tool seems like a handy one, it does sadden me that in this day and age the installation method is curl | sh.

    1. 4

      Agree 100%. I don’t know how that dire mechanism of installation became “a thing”. FFS, it’s everywhere and it annoys the hell out of me. I guess people can argue that it’s the same as make install as root (which I also dislike), but at least we’ve moved on in that realm, to binary package managers.

      1. 1

        What would you prefer?

        1. 4

          A traditional tarball for a start? And for those that use it, the ability to install it using their package manager of choice (I see Homebrew support is on the way).

          1. 3

            A traditional tarball for a start?

            Are you just saying you prefer to untar > ./configure > make > make install route? I don’t really understand the benefit of a “traditional tarball” other than if it had an MD5 to go with it to verify package contents.

            And for those that use it, the ability to install it using their package manager of choice (I see Homebrew support is on the way).

            Yeah, I definitely prefer a package manager to curl # | sh

          2. 2

            Most anything that’s not curl|sh really…for homebrew users there’s hope though.