225 pointsby mikemcquaid5 hours ago17 comments
  • mikemcquaid5 hours ago
    Today, I’m proud to announce Homebrew 7.0.0. The most significant changes since 6.0.0 are faster installations and upgrades, stronger sandboxing, a native macOS app, built-in vulnerability checks and an advisory database, the end of macOS 10.15 support and Intel Macs moving to Tier 3 (announced last year).
    • d3Xt3r5 hours ago
      Literally just upgraded before seeing this post; I had 31 outdated packages and the first thing I saw was how blazing fast it was! I looked online to see if something changed and saw this post.

      Speed was my biggest complaint about brew, so I'm glad to cross that one off my list of things I don't like about brew.

      Thank you for your hard work BTW, brew's been a lifesaver on macOS and immutable distros.

      • mikemcquaid4 hours ago
        Glad to hear it. A lot of time and energy has gone into performance work so glad that’s noticeable! Thanks for the kid words too <3
    • mikae12 hours ago
      Thank you for Linux Homebrew! It works so damn well.

      For me the distro package manager is for system packages, Homebrew and Flatpak for the user facing apps.

      • curt152 hours ago
        Where do you draw the line between system packages and user facing apps? Some software defies such an easy categorization. If your default install doesn't come with docker and you install docker later for development, does that make docker a user-facing app? What about language toolchains like golang, rust, npm, etc?
        • mikae12 hours ago
          > Where do you draw the line between system packages and user facing apps?

          If it works in Homebrew, I almost always pick Homebrew. :) I have a pretty good feeling for what works since for the past few years I've mostly used an atomic distro (Aurora, based on Universal Blue, based on Fedora). It just comes naturally for me on Fedora too.

          I've found that this way you can get many of the stability pros of using an atomic distro even on a non-atomic one.

      • 27 minutes ago
        undefined
      • shevy-javaan hour ago
        I don't understand the distinction you use here.

        Then again I use versioned AppDirs on Linux since +20 years anyway, so I am not really into any arbitrary disctinction random linux distributions try to push down onto the (downstream) userbase. Besides, if you compile from source, why would you want to rely on the distribution package manager to begin with?

        None of them allow for versioned AppDirs by default as far as I know; NixOS uses a hashed name, so that is the only exception I can think of (and GoboLinux of course), but as far as I know if you are on e. g. a debian system, you can not use it for a versioned AppDir layout.

        • mikae122 minutes ago
          > I don't understand the distinction you use here.

          Distinction: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49683258

          I use "dnf" to upgrade my system and "flatpak update" and "brew upgrade" to upgrade the apps I've installed.

          An app like VirtualBox does not install using Flatpak or Homebrew, so I would use dnf for that. It's usually an app or two that doesn't work via Flatpak/Homebrew/AppImage that I need to install using dnf.

        • F3nd039 minutes ago
          > NixOS uses a hashed name, so that is the only exception I can think of (and GoboLinux of course)

          Also Guix, which is inspired by Nix. Don’t know about AppDir support, though. Are AppDirs more of a general concept or a formalised standard? In what capacity are you using them?

    • jdorfman13 minutes ago
      Congrats and thank you to you and your team for maintaining critical infrastructure we all take for granted.
    • darkamaul2 hours ago
      Silly question - but how do you apply the cooldown to brew itself ?

      I would think this is one of the most critical dependency that you would not want to get right away at let it rest for a couple of days

      • mikemcquaidan hour ago
        You can’t, by design. We instead apply if for you on upstream packages from NPM, PyPi, etc.

        Our model is very different to those where cooldowns exist and make sense. As-is if would just delay security updates too.

    • lukeify4 hours ago
      I don't know what I would do without brew on my Macs. Thank you and everyone who contributes!
    • larodi36 minutes ago
      would you please share what amount of the new dev (work done on brew) is AI/LLM-assisted. this major version bump was very quick to arrive compared to when v6 got released?
      • mikemcquaid23 minutes ago
        Can’t speak for others but a lot of my work. I review it all locally first. The flow feels a lot like reviewing human PRs locally.

        https://github.com/MikeMcQuaid/AgentIDE

        I actually wrote my own “Agent IDE” to make this prompt/review/push flow easier.

    • lifty3 hours ago
      I think at one point you said you’re working on a rust rewrite? Is that still in the cards?
  • Sytten2 hours ago
    I found that Mise handles all my needs for development and it is scoped so it doesn't try to update Python and break all my virtual env when I install something new /shrug
    • hk13372 hours ago
      I split my usage. Homebrew for OS things mise for the various tooling.

      The only problem some things still have a dependency on requiring python and others on the system. The problem being that they’re there, mise works just fine.

    • 9dev2 hours ago
      Why would you even use python without uv anymore, and have a system python binary and virtual envs linked to it?
    • artdigitalan hour ago
      I also started using Mise for global CLI tools instead of brew and it’s working really well

      Eg: mise use -g gcloud instead of brew install xxx

      It can even do that for npm packages! Like mise use -g npm:xxx

    • acedTrex7 minutes ago
      Mise is really sloppily vibe coded these days
    • bodash2 hours ago
      my split: brew for casks, mise for tools
  • simonwan hour ago
    TIL Homebrew has its own sandbox mechanism - looks like it's built around their own sandbox-exec wrapper, at least on macOS: https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/blob/d79ef822ab8136e393ed5f...
    • mikemcquaid21 minutes ago
      Yup! We’ve been using it for a really long time at this point.

      Were using Bubblewrap on Linux and moved to Landlock this release.

      P.S. HUGE fan of your blog and writing Simon, keep up the great work. It’s the #1 resource I recommend to anyone in the industry wanting to learn more about LLMs (and pelicans).

  • blixtan hour ago
    I was surprised to see my Homebrew consider my macOS a Tier 2 for using the very latest macOS version and Xcode version… But I think it's because I don't have Xcode 27.0, which is presumably releasing tomorrow?
    • illiac78624 minutes ago
      What is the impact of being tier 2?

      I’ll update Xcode, but I will definitely not install macOS 27.0

    • mikemcquaid21 minutes ago
      This is a bug, sorry. Working on it.
  • internet2000an hour ago
    The GUI is pretty sharp, but I don’t like it uses emoji instead of SF symbols.

    Is it Claude or Codex built?

    • mikemcquaid19 minutes ago
      I didn’t build it. The emoji were my idea. I (and Homebrew) have used them heavily before LLMs did. Maybe LLMs loving them is my fault. Sorry if so.
    • illiac78622 minutes ago
      I don’t get these questions asking if it’s codex or Claude – I see them often. Does it matter? There are other options out there also, it feels strange to ask this. Like asking “is your car a Toyota or a BMW?“
  • asadhaider3 hours ago
    Awesome, I just checked and had already upgraded at some point. I run the alias command below every now and then which keeps everything up to date.

      alias u="brew update && brew upgrade --greedy -y && brew upgrade --cask -y && brew cleanup"
  • lrvick2 hours ago
    Just remember that brew still must never be installed on a machine you need to be able to trust.

    The supply chain security policy of brew is basically non existent and optimized for low-friction contributions. Think wikipedia. No enforced commit signing, review signing, or multi-party release signing, and thus everything is honor system.

    Do not put brew anywhere near systems that access production or even on systems used to review production-bound code.

  • roger_3 hours ago
    Does installation still require root and a dedicated user account on Linux?

    That really put me off.

    • mikemcquaid2 hours ago
      See the release notes: we now have experimental support for using any prefix shorter than the Linux default. We are aiming to eventually fully support (Tier 1) any prefix under 64 bytes long.
      • mort96an hour ago
        Wait what? Why prefix length limits? Linux paths can be 4096 bytes long, I can't imagine y'all are hitting that?
        • akerl_an hour ago
          I’d imagine they’re live updating the library paths in the binary headers, so anything shorter or equal to what they’re using is a simple rewrite, but longer is more complex.
          • mort9642 minutes ago
            Ah. That makes sense.

            It's so annoying how deeply UNIX packaging philosophy assumes that installation directories are something you hard-code at build time.

            • akerl_23 minutes ago
              The present is built mostly on layers of the long-past :)

              It makes me think of when Arch merged /usr/bin and sbin with /bin and sbin. Having them split made sense in a ton of scenarios that used to be very common, but increasingly the split was vestigial for most users.

              • mort9613 minutes ago
                Yea, my understanding is that the split between / and /usr used to be more or less: the drive they used for / ran out of space, so they mounted another drive as /usr. As a consequence, / became where you put stuff that was essential during early boot, while /usr was where you put everything else.

                But these days, "early boot" is handled by initramfs and we've all got drives large enough to not need the split anyway.

        • orfan hour ago
          Pouring a bottle requires rewriting paths embedded in binaries, which results in a cap.

          Postgres is an example of this: the various directories are set at build time.

    • wscott3 hours ago
      The dedicated user isn't really required; it just expects that /home/linuxbrew/.linuxbrew exists. That can just be a symlink to your home directory. But yes, creating that symlink requires root on most systems. Brew itself doesn't require root or that pathname; you can put packages anywhere, but then many will have to be built from scratch since the pre-built packages don't work. And you need bubblewrap installed (which requires root) to use the sandbox, but again that is optional.

      All that said, when you are running without a sandbox installing to a nonstandard location, not everything works consistently. I run this mode all the time. But it has been getting better.

      • trallnag3 hours ago
        Bubblewrap is history starting with 7.0.0 according to the release notes
    • hk13372 hours ago
      I always download the install script and change the directory to my user home directory, ~/.brew
    • dghlsakjg3 hours ago
      The dedicated user account is optional.

      It uses root once to chown its prefix directory /home/linuxbrew/.linuxbrew

  • aydgn3 hours ago
    Farewell, Homebrew. It's been a good run.

    - 2019 Intel iMac user.

    • mikemcquaid2 hours ago
      Sorry we couldn’t support this for longer :(

      From the release notes:

      > The Intel support decision reflects the limits of a volunteer-run project: Apple have dropped Intel x86_64 support from macOS 27 Golden Gate and GitHub Actions will retire Intel macOS runners in autumn 2027. If Apple and Microsoft’s GitHub, two of the world’s largest technology companies, cannot continue supporting macOS Intel x86_64, sadly neither can Homebrew. MacPorts still supports macOS Intel x86_64 and is likely to provide better results on this platform.

      • donatjan hour ago
        My personal opinion, but I'd rather see wider macOS support than Linux support, if it's a sheer matter of where time is allocated.

        Linux already has world class package managers.

        • mikemcquaid16 minutes ago
          Linux Homebrew users would disagree.

          Supporting macOS Intel has been significantly harder, slower and more expensive for us the last few years than adding ARM Linux support. If it was easy and free we’d have kept it for longer (until Apple and GitHub killed theirs at least which is coming in less than a year).

      • jezek2an hour ago
        How come that MacPorts supports macOS versions all the way back to 10.5 Leopard in the latest version?
        • sethaurus13 minutes ago
          That's an excellent question for the maintainers of the MacPorts project! It can supplement the very clear and polite answer you've already received from a maintainer of Homebrew.
      • euan hour ago
        very disappointed about this
    • kps12 minutes ago
      MacPorts is still there for us.
  • AbuAssar2 hours ago
    the gui homebrew manager is a nice addition!

    it can be installed with:

    brew install homebrew-app

    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
  • gdevenyian hour ago
    Does it still need root on Linux? That makes it an instant no go.
    • mikemcquaid18 minutes ago
      For initial installation to the default prefix someone needs to create the home directory and that person is probably root.

      We hope to allow all prefixes under 64 bytes in future.

  • touwer3 hours ago
    Fantastic, thx for the effort!
  • max9792 hours ago
    Time to `brew update && brew upgrade` later today. Always a little nervous, but Homebrew usually makes it painless.
    • inatreecrown22 hours ago
      I have this bound to an alias: bu

      Run it every couple of days, easy peasy.

  • basedpolymer3 hours ago
    And that's the end of Homebrew for me as a user. I like the app, but my old Intel MacBook apparently can't handle it anymore.

    I'm back to the old installation methods !

    • supriyo-biswasa minute ago
      I've used MacPorts on macOS versions that don't support the latest OS, which per homebrew policy seems to be versions upto N-2.

      Apart from the issue of having to compile the downloaded software leading to spinning fans, I'm not too concerned.

    • mikae12 hours ago
      Actually, Homebrew 7 is supported on your Mac, you just have to install Linux to use it. :)

      If you want to continue using the same MacBook that will be only path forward when Apple decides to EOL it (if it hasn't already happened).

      I'm a long time Homebrew on Linux user, it works really well. I always prefer it over the distro supplied package manager for user facing CLI apps.

    • VCFundedGenYera minute ago
      You do realize Intel support is gone, right? You won't be installing anything on your Intel Mac very soon...
    • asimovDev26 minutes ago
      I recommend MacPorts, the migration is easy, you copy the package names you installed with brew, uninstall homebrew (there's an unisntall script on brew.sh FAQ section, it will also uninstall all homebrew packages (but not the casks)) then install macports and reinstall the packages with sudo port. Although the selection is smaller on macports and newer packages might not have a prebuilt pkg for your OS so you still might end up building manually (My poor i5 4core had to attempt building nodejs26 because there wasn't a pkg for Ventura)
    • wpm43 minutes ago
      MacPorts has been there this whole time.
    • yladiz3 hours ago
      How long do you expect them to support Intel processors though? It’s been like 6 years since the last MacBook release had any Intel processor, and Apple doesn’t make OS updates anymore, so it doesn’t surprise me that Homebrew stopped too.
      • watermelon02 hours ago
        Are you implying that a 6 year old hardware is as good as a paperweight? Outside of the Apple fairyland this is just bonkers.

        I'm not blaming the Homebrew project/developers here, but the fact that many people are okay with deprecating perfectly fine hardware.

        • VCFundedGenYera few seconds ago
          You're on macOS. you should know full well that they do not care about those values.
        • nebezb5 minutes ago
          No, he’s asking what you think a reasonable support timeline is. An open source project supporting hardware 6 years old is pretty awesome.
      • basiliobeltran2 hours ago
        I have one of the last Intel Macs and works perfectly fine (on Sonoma). How long should I expect working tech being supported?

        I am already looking at Linux, but still need to get out of the Apple ecosystem. I am not going to spend +2500 Euros every 5 years on a laptop

        • lnenad2 hours ago
          What does saying "working tech" do for you? If I have a working Samsung CRT from 25 years ago do I ping them about smart TV support? Nowadays it's a shitty situation with planned obsolescence; but 6 years for an open source project dedicating resources to a dead end is more than enough and appreciated.
          • 2 hours ago
            undefined
      • trvzan hour ago
        And given the performance jump from Intel to Apple Silicon, the perceived difference is 10+ years even.
        • larodi39 minutes ago
          Sure, but 2019s Intel Macs are aboslutely usable for most tasks, and given much of the agentic dev. happens... somewhere remotely, it is more an opportunity to reuse this equipment for various tasks, rather than pollute the already dirty Earth with more electronic waste.
    • ActionHank24 minutes ago
      I’m installing Linux on my 2019 16” today.
    • daliusd2 hours ago
      Same here, but I understand their position. Meanwhile I rely on packages publishing builds for Intel Mac in GitHub (surprisingly a lot) or building from source code. I just asked AI to build me install system.
    • Achterlangs2 hours ago
      FYI Macos will also stop with major updates for Intel macs. You can just keep using brew 6 on macos 26.
    • wltr3 hours ago
      Have you tried Mac Ports?
    • alex7o3 hours ago
      [flagged]
  • yard20103 hours ago
    Thank you so much for doing this, for years you make me feel like home, or the year 2010. Please don't ever stop!
  • launchkitcodesan hour ago
    [dead]
  • assimpleaspossian hour ago
    [flagged]
    • pdpi38 minutes ago
      "That front page" isn't the front page, it's the release notes for version 7.0.0.

      The actual front page has "The Package Manager for Everywhere" as its subtitle (and that exact description as part of its <title>), and that is basically all you need to know. It's a staple for Unix-y power users on macOS (but supports Linux too, including WSL), and version 1.0 will be ten years old next week. You're not very far off from complaining that Postgres release notes don't explain that Postgres is a database.

      • assimpleaspossi28 minutes ago
        Yes. Thank you. The link text gives the impression that is the front page and I didn't notice. I'm sure a lot of people don't notice which is the issue I'm trying to point out.
    • drewbug01an hour ago
      If you actually clicked through to their homepage, I imagine you would find the “what does homebrew do” section quite enlightening.
      • assimpleaspossian hour ago
        I did. If you actually read what I wrote you would see that I read it.
    • mcsniffan hour ago
      It's a package manager.

      The second header on the main page:

      What Does Homebrew Do?

      Homebrew installs the command-line tools and applications you need across macOS, Linux and WSL.

      • assimpleaspossian hour ago
        That doesn't make sense. Why do I need Homebrew to install the command line tools of macOS on macOS? Doesn't macOS already have them installed? Same for Linux, etc.
        • atombender44 minutes ago
          Replace "need" with "want" and it might make more sense?

          Homebrew is the Mac equivalent of APT, Pacman, RPM, BSD ports, etc. It's a fairly traditional package manager for software that doesn't come with macOS. "brew install postgresql" installs Postgres into /opt/homebrew, for example.

    • 36 minutes ago
      undefined
    • coherentponyan hour ago
      It’s a package manager for Mac.
      • assimpleaspossian hour ago
        So Mac doesn't have a package manager?
        • niek_pas33 minutes ago
          No first-party package manager.
        • asimovDev30 minutes ago
          does App Store count?
    • hooverlabsan hour ago
      It’s just another software package manager for installing dev tools