[chuck-users] Question re: installing ChucK on Mac

Hans Aberg haberg-1 at telia.com
Fri Aug 13 04:06:48 EDT 2010

On 13 Aug 2010, at 02:32, Tom Lieber wrote:

>> The normal would be the opposite: the miniAudicle has a pre-made  
>> symlink to
>> /usr/local/bin/chuck. Then, when the latter is updates, miniAudicle  
>> will use
>> it.
>> If for some reason, one does not want miniAUdicle to change, just  
>> let it
>> have a binary as is the case now. One will then run different  
>> binaries in it
>> and from the console.
> I'm not quite sure what you're saying, but if miniAudicle installs a
> ChucK in /usr/local/bin, then I don't see a reason to have a separate
> package just for command-line ChucK.

Mac OS X has a mixture of traditions, one comes from Mac OS 9, making  
applications (directories) which are complete in themselves, and  
should be able to run in any directory, but normally put into / 
Applications/. For example, the LilyPond application has its lilypond  
binary in
When checking miniAudicle, it seems it just have a binary
but not 'chuck' binary. This is the binary used when starting  
miniAudicle from the GUI (Finder); it then gets some extra startup  
argument from the system (as can be seen using 'ps -x'). It is  
otherwise just a normal Unix binary adapted to be calleed from the GUI.

The other tradition comes from BSD Unix. The stuff is normally put  
into /usr/local.

These traditions can be combined, which is done by the TeX Live  
package. It puts all traditional Unix stuff into /usr/local/, but also  
has some application in /Applications/ which calls it.

Since miniAudicle does not seem to install 'chuck', the installer  
might simply do that to. Possibly one might have the choice not  
installing it.

More information about the chuck-users mailing list