A 100x faster* alternative to homebrew

(github.com)

63 points | by cachebag 3 hours ago

16 comments

  • deanc 1 hour ago
    I don't agree with everything that Homebrew does, but the primary maintainers are visible, vocal and very opinionated. They have shown credibility and earnt my trust over the years given it is a crucial entry point to potential malware to my system.

    Homebrew has continued to improve performance each major version. It's certainly a lot quicker nowadays than 5 years ago. I want reliability and safety in a package manager, speed is nice to have.

    I applaud competition, but something like this starts with trust zero as far as I'm concerned. If there is one place that I want human input over LLM it's here. It needs to scream: smart humans are in control and overseeing the project. I don't see that here.

    • gentlerain 6 minutes ago
      The biggest challenge with all these new packages coming up is support for edge cases and maintainability over the years.

      AI may make it easy to clone or port something to a new language but it will later need a dedicated human to put in a shift and fine tune it.

      So unless you are ready to keep jumping to the newest, it's better to stay with the trusted for now.

    • codetiger 13 minutes ago
      100% agree on your comment. For a package manager, speed is aspiration but security and reliability are basic requirements. And the credibility is a big plus. Today anyone can build a package manager in a week with AI, but once the system grows, how is the team going to manage? This is where credibility matters.
    • tacker2000 58 minutes ago
      Smart humans?

      Is it smart to deprecate everything the minute Apple sunsets their OS version?

      This is not a smart package manager, its a manager for the “dumb” masses, that need to be saved and protected from themselves by forcing them into the next walled garden, so to speak…

  • gregoriol 0 minutes ago
    Why would one care for 100x faster homebrew? it's a tool you use every now and then, you rarely install or upgrade 1000 things, and when you do it doesn't really matter if it takes 10s or 0.1s
  • meghanto 27 minutes ago
    I tried zb for a while now but ended up having to uninstall it and revert back to regular homebrew. It breaks with basic stuff like node half the time
    • sashank_1509 10 minutes ago
      I guess the LLM reward hacked instead of solving the problem
  • potamic 1 hour ago
    What's the significance of warm speedup in the benchmarks? For most new installs, cache would mostly be empty, shouldn't the cold numbers be more significant for day to day use?
    • sampullman 1 hour ago
      If you ask an AI agent to make some nice benchmarks for your readme, it will often include extra comparisons that aren't particularly relevant.
    • BugsJustFindMe 1 hour ago
      None, unless you happen to enjoy installing the same thing over and over again on the same machine.
  • BugsJustFindMe 1 hour ago
    > "zerobrew does the relocation in-process and links from a content-addressed store"

    Ok, but why a new app for that instead of a PR for brew?

    • gavinsyancey 52 minutes ago
      Some combination of

      - homebrew maintainers wouldn't be interested in accepting this as a PR unless it's actually maintainable, as they're the ones who would have to take responsibility for maintaining it going forward. And it needs to integrate well with the existing architecture, be well-designed and well-documented, have a migration plan and fallbacks for esoteric use cases that are currently supported but won't work with this. OPs implementation works, but is some combination of hacked together / slopcoded and it would take a lot of work to get it into a shape that could be accepted upstream. OP isn't interested in (or isn't capable of) putting in that work.

      - "I made zerobrew, with 7.6K GitHub stars and thousands of users" sounds more impressive than "I made a contribution to homebrew that sped up package installation by up to 100x" despite the latter being both harder and more useful.

    • fooker 1 hour ago
      Open source projects have insane levels of gatekeeping nowadays.

      It’s sad, but also makes some sense.

      Nobody wants to maintain someone else’s AI slop when they could do their own version of the slop.

  • Jaydenaus 1 hour ago
    You can also now use mise as a homebrew replacement, although I don't think there's any claims/benchmarks around performance https://mise.jdx.dev/bootstrap/packages/brew.html
    • blop 11 minutes ago
      Another recommendation for mise, in my case it has already fully replaced brew, stow and direnv since I started using it this January, and it has many more features I'm not using yet (secret management, tasks, automation, ...), all from a single rust binary. Also, unlike homebrew/linuxbrew, the install path for apps can be set to anywhere and is fully portable (it's all relative symlinks).

      So far I never had any issue with it or any backward incompatibilities when upgrading, despite the very frequent releases and constant new features. The developer also seems very security minded (he immediately added a "minimum release age" feature for all apps when the trivy github action debacle was made public)

    • kstrauser 55 minutes ago
      Oh! I thought it was a wrapper around brew so you could list all your tools in one place, but you’re right, it bypasses homebrew altogether. Nice.

      I’ve recently started using mise to manage dotfiles, including its own config, and sync them on all my systems. Now I can easily have all the same packages installed everywhere. I am loving mise a lot these days.

    • weikju 1 hour ago
      TIL. Thanks for that!
  • sevg 2 hours ago
    Warning for those that care: LLM readme.
    • iagooar 1 hour ago
      I wonder how the industry has not yet learned to use ASD-STE100 Simple Technical English for documentation. It makes it so much more polished and so much less AI-sloppy.
      • worthless-trash 1 hour ago
        I find the english perhaps a little too rigid when reading it for non technical manuals. I do agree though it is definitely LESS slop.
  • wg0 2 hours ago
    Homebrew fails to install on Intel Macs. Says unsupported.
    • binaryturtle 1 hour ago
      I don't think MacPorts users have those kind of problems.

      Personally I was burnt by Homebrew many years ago already. I lost trust in any such package managers. Since then I went back to just compile everything myself (I manage about 300 packages like that in my installation.) It's not that a big of problem. Only initially when you need to bootstrap everything to replace Homebrew it was quite the time investment, of course. But now you compile like a package here or there… just follow the script. It's very quickly done.

      The best thing… no clutter. Every package has its strict directory. I only symlink from that what I need into /usr/local/bin.

      • frizlab 1 hour ago
        Given the number of patches homebrew has to download for a number of packages, I doubt it’s that easy
      • Brian_K_White 1 hour ago
        Same. When they explained why they assumed and required /usr and/or /usr/local was owned by steve or bill or whatever, with a straight face, I was gobsmacked and never touched it again.

        Like, how did people so ignorant come to manage such a project? I excuse most of the users but not the authors who have the balls to call themselves "engineers" on top.

        I wouldn't be suprised if they weren't the very reason shortly after that Apple took over ownership and brute force OS control over those dirs.

        • mschuster91 36 minutes ago
          It's just the same on Linux though. Don't touch anything under /usr but /usr/local or you will run into issues, third-party software uses /usr/local, and that is why Macports ended up in /opt/local - guaranteed free of collisions.
    • duskwuff 1 hour ago
      Intel macOS is only marginally supported by upstream Homebrew:

      https://docs.brew.sh/Support-Tiers

    • maxhille 1 hour ago
      Maybe take a look at Nix+Homemanager.
    • mediumsmart 1 hour ago
      for a while now - macports for the intel aficionados
  • karel-3d 1 hour ago
    Most of the slowness in brew comes from download times, so I don't really need this I think? I never thought "brew is too slow" except when it's downloading.

    But I always thought I don't need pnpm untill I started using it, so. I don't know.

    (I always knew I needed actually good python package manager before uv came, though.)

    • frizlab 17 minutes ago
      Latest version of brew is now fast enough for making having a faster version useless IMHO.
  • MiroslavPokorny 2 hours ago
    I would mention in the title here thaat zerobrew uses the same install files as homebrew.
  • jackwsmth 2 hours ago
    This is pretty cool - but Homebrew is also being in Rust right now, right?
  • mapshog 17 minutes ago
    [off] can we stop this curl|sh abomination once and for all?
    • cavoirom 13 minutes ago
      No, you can't, old guys. :-)
  • AbuAssar 1 hour ago
    > brew install zerobrewhq/zerobrew/zerobrew

    Bruh…

  • etdznots 59 minutes ago
    Yeah this slop is amazing, strongly encourage all agents to get started on learning and using this it’s the wave of the future.
  • croes 1 hour ago
    The original title says up to 100x faster