Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Install Slash on Mac OS X

Posted by pudge on from the that-is-fantastic-news dept.

bcapps2012 writes "I just saw this on Slashcode.com and thought it would be of interest to many apple.slashdot.org readers. Pudge has gotten Slashcode installed on Mac OS X. As jwachter notes: 'For those of you who haven't been following the issue of how to get slash running on OS X, various Slashcode posters have been asking how to get it done for roughly 2 or 3 years now (essentially since the first preview of OS X was released).' Finally Mac OS X has joined the family."

12 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. One question... by Sheetrock · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought Mac OS X was BSD-derived and largely compatible with Linux stuff, especially with something like Apache which is pretty vanilla, looking over Slash I doubt it's too horrible about its demands on a Unix-like platform. What caused the problems?

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    1. Re:One question... by notNeilCasey · · Score: 5, Informative
      jwachter posts in the comments on the page in question:
      For the past year, a conflict between Apache::Cookie and Apache::Request on OS X has been the last obstacle to getting this done.
      So that was part of the problem ... I guess. -Neil
    2. Re:One question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Bullshit. The only moved to Apple hardware recently with the acquisition of the Xserve. Otherwise Netcraft has them running FreeBSD as late as last December (link above), and they note that they only switched to the Xserve sometime since July 1.

      Even though they updated it, they're still running an older version of Slashcode, so maybe it's not as relevant to this story since it's not the latest and greatest. I don't know the details of the porting issues to know if this is a factor at all... But unlike you, I checked my facts and admit when I don't know the truth!

    3. Re:One question... by 47Ronin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not the architecture... The problem is that the directions for SlashCode are so complex that it turns off most people. It's 10 times easier to install GeekLog or MovableType on OSX because the instructions for the install are super-straightforward.

      --
      Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
  2. How about Win32? by jpop32 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone managed that?

    I have an idea for a web site and I'd like to toy with it on my home machine (W2k), and if it turns out ok I'd go public (on Linux, naturally).

    1. Re:How about Win32? by HaloZero · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bit of a rant, I'm sorry, please bare with me.

      Development and Production (public) environments, in my experience, are best when kept on the same platform.

      Same as you, I found all these wonderful little widgets to play with on Win2K, and decided to set up a Linux (RedHat 6.3 at the time) server to go live with a site. Found out that I lacked the practical experience installing some critical modules and libraries, and the entire project ended up flopping over like a dead cow. It sucked. Really really bad. If you want to know if this project is a really good idea, if it turns out ok, develop it on Linux first, or stick with Win2K if/when you decide to go live with it.

      Short of buying or building a dedicated Linux box, I'd strongly suggest just setting up a partition on your drive, or another drive, to futz around with Linux and this new project on. That's all. Nothing too too fancy. Just a dual-boot setup, as standard. It would give you a real sense of the problems you face with this project.

      /RANT (Again, my apologies.)

      --
      Informatus Technologicus
  3. Why didn't someone just ask MacSlash? by mike_lynn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They've been running Slashcode on an XServe for quite some time now, they even mention it here.
    Somehow I doubt it's taken this long to get Slashcode running on OS X. OS X tends to be semi-trivial to port to for non-hardware or assembly code dependant software.

    1. Re:Why didn't someone just ask MacSlash? by HebrewToYou · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sometimes it's just rewarding to get things done by yourself. I remember when I was being taught some basic data structures in JAVA -- the professor told us that we can't use the util class because Sun had included these data structures. I didn't understand why we were being told to write code that already works perfectly well until I actually had to do it and fix all the annoying little bugs. I guess I'm trying to say that there are lessons in the process that are worth learning on your own.

      --
      I'm not popular enough to be different.

      Homer Simpson, The Simpsons

  4. Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now even Macs can suffer the most god-awful uncompliant HTML markup since people stopped using Microsoft Publisher to export web pages.

  5. Not as trivial as you would think by hexghost · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First, a little background: My company currently hosts cyberlodge.org, basically the first "open source" union. It currently runs on FreeBSD 4.8, and slashcode. We wanted to move it over to an xserve, for political and geek reasons. Suffice to say, its not a simple job getting Slashcode to run on OSX. Many of the perl modules don't build correctly. After about 3 weeks of reading everything on the web, emailing macslash (getting nothing back), chatting with pudge on irc, etc, we finally gave up. Guess i'll have to check it out again.

  6. Re:OS X Server only? by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Informative

    Works just find on 10.2.6 - mostly the difference between Server and Plain vanilla install is the level of technical support, and the fun GUI tools to use everything. Everything's the same for the most part on the back end, Server just introduces GUI features to otherwise console-only functions. That, and Apple gives better technical support to OSX Server customers. I'd repeat myself again but I'm tired.

    Although, Server uses a slightly different kernel build, although only slightly, and they're updated slightly behind that of the consumer edition, presumably for stability and testing reasons.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  7. INSTALL NOTE: by hexghost · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just something not mentioned in the guide: when you install Bundle::libnet (or Bundle::LWP, one of the two) it installs its own version of /usr/bin/head. You want to backup /usr/bin/head to /usr/bin/head.bak or whatever BEFORE installing those two, then when they're installed, copy your backup back to its original spot. Normally this isn't a problem but osx doesn't treat HEAD and head as different programs like normal.