If only Mac OS X ever got a proper packaging system (one not for installing nice GUI apps, but for deploying infrastructure things like libraries) - then it would be on par. Right now, unfortunately, it's still subpar - doing the same things takes more time. I know theres ports and fink and homebrew, but each of them has its deficiencies, and they regularly step on each other's toes and make a mess of the system.
I might be out of line here but it sounds like you may not have given homebrew a decent enough chance. Fink and macports have always had problems, but a fresh Lion install + homebrew has about the same number of issues as a package manager as apt-get/dpkg on a stock Debian system, which is to say, not many. It definitely doesnt mess up the system without a great deal of willful effort to do so. Give it another chance.
I had a lot of trouble explaining homebrew difference between i386 and x64 builds and getting it to build the right ones. It does not mess up the system by itself, but getting it to do the right thing requires some serious digging into the config formats - or at least it did when I needed it about a year ago.
There's a simple answer to that one. It's "don't use multiple package managers, you numpty". Use Homebrew. If it's missing a package, write a formula. Fork the repo on Github, brew-tap it [1], and if you think other people could use it, open a pull request.
That's exactly the problem. I don't want to write formulas. Just as on Linux I don't have to write RPMs - I just download them and install them. Yes, I can write a formula. Yes, it is not hard (in 90% of the cases). But it takes time, and I don't have extra time for it. And it takes learning yet another thing, which I don't need - and I have enough things to learn already that I do need.
I don't want to spend mental energy on it - I just want it to work. Linux achieved it, to a great degree, and Mac OS X still didn't.
