From dmurdoch at pair.com  Fri Jul 16 03:50:25 2004
From: dmurdoch at pair.com (Duncan Murdoch)
Date: Fri Jul 16 03:50:29 2004
Subject: [Rd] Re: [R] adding option in the Windows installer for --internet2
In-Reply-To: <3A822319EB35174CA3714066D590DCD504AF8060@usrymx25.merck.com>
References: <3A822319EB35174CA3714066D590DCD504AF8060@usrymx25.merck.com>
Message-ID: <sbbef013d36dhbsm2joopffqh26ou5kkla@4ax.com>

(Moved from r-help)

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:41:54 -0400, "Liaw, Andy" <andy_liaw@merck.com>
wrote:

>The XEmacs and cygwin netinstaller has three install options: "Use IE5
>settings", "Direct connection" (or something like that) and "Install from
>local disk".  Option #2 never work for me, but #1 does.  

Yes, I've seen that, but I never knew what it meant, and so it didn't
give me confidence in the installation.  (Did I make the right choice?
How would I know if I didn't?)

>I suspect the R
>installer can do something similar:  offer the two options (with and
>without), and somehow test if the connection (to CRAN) works.  If not,
>prompt the user to try the other option.

We don't have a netinstaller, so a connection to CRAN is not
necessary.  I would guess that a large number of people installing R
don't have a net connection at the time, because a lot of students get
it on a CD.

> My take is that this option should
>be (semi?) permanent:  If it's needed, it's needed all the time for that
>installation.  

It seems to me that if internet2 works at all, it should always be
used, whether necessary or not.  (It might be that your machine is
behind a firewall sometimes, but not always:  but if you've got the
required library installed, you probably won't lose it.)

Maybe internet2 should be the default now.  I'd guess nowadays most
Windows systems would support it.

Does anyone know if there are any disadvantages to using the WinINet
functions via internet2.dll instead of the WinSock functions via
internet.dll?

Duncan Murdoch


[Rd] Re: [R] adding option in the Windows installer for --internet2
Duncan Murdoch