From skyebend at skyeome.net  Mon Jun 16 19:18:00 2014
From: skyebend at skyeome.net (Skye Bender-deMoll)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 10:18:00 -0700
Subject: [Rd] what is the current correct repos structure for mac osx
 binaries?
In-Reply-To: <429A4CCF-F996-4C40-9A80-68373348EED4@r-project.org>
References: <539B700F.7080902@skyeome.net>
	<429A4CCF-F996-4C40-9A80-68373348EED4@r-project.org>
Message-ID: <539F26C8.2020904@skyeome.net>

Dear R-devel,

Apologies for the confusing typo in the reported paths my previous 
question, thanks to Simon for providing the answer that the default 
repository type on the mac is now "mac.binary.mavericks" not 
"mac.binary" as the docs for install.packages state.

Perhaps the docs for install packages could be updated something like:


...
type  character, indicating the type of package to download and install

Possible values are (currently) "source", "mac.binary.BUILD_NAME" and 
"win.binary". The BUILD_NAME on OSX is determined internally by ???.
...


I'm still not quite clear how the CRAN-like repository should be 
structured for OSX.  CRAN seems to include .tgz packages in both

http://cran.r-project.org/bin/macosx/contrib/3.1/

and

http://cran.r-project.org/bin/macosx/mavericks/contrib/3.1/

The directory contents are not identical, but both include packages 
built as recently as today.  Is bin/macosx/contrib/3.1/  a snowleopard 
build?  Do I need to maintain two directories as well?

It seems like if I put my packages in

http://foo/bin/macosx/contrib/3.1/

the mavericks machines won't find them.  But if I put the packages in

http://foo/bin/macosx/mavericks/contrib/3.1/

people with the snowleopard build wont find them.  Perhaps this is the 
desired behavior if the mavericks binaries are not snowleopard compatible?

thanks again for your help,
  -skye





On 06/13/2014 05:22 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>
> On Jun 13, 2014, at 5:41 PM, Skye Bender-deMoll <skyebend at skyeome.net> wrote:
>
>> Dear R-developers,
>>
>> As part of our package building process, we maintain internal CRAN-like repositories of our packages.  This has worked pretty well, but we are running into issues with R 3.1 and OSX mavericks.
>>
>> Specifically, machines with osx mavericks seem to, by default, expect packages to be located under a 'mavericks' sub-directory, but this is not the location reported when generating a mac.binary appropriate contrib url.
>>
>>> contrib.url('foo')
>> [1] "foo/bin/macosx/mavericks/contrib/3.1/"
>>
>>
>> If I ask where the mac binaries are on a linux machine (AND on mac mavericks machines) I get
>>
>>> contrib.url('foo',type='mac.binary')
>> [1] "foo/bin/macosx/mavericks/contrib/3.1/"
>>
>
> I don't think that is true. On all machines (Linux, OS X, ...) I get
>
>> contrib.url('foo', type='mac.binary')
> [1] "foo/bin/macosx/contrib/3.1"
>
>
> Note that the type for the mavericks build is "mac.binary.mavericks", so on all machines you also get
>
>> contrib.url('foo',type='mac.binary.mavericks')
> [1] "foo/bin/macosx/mavericks/contrib/3.1"
>
> The only difference are the defaults for pkgType - they differ by the build, but the repo structure is fixed and consistent across all platforms.
>
> Cheers,
> Simon
>
>
>>
>> But the OSX machine gives an error and fails to locate the packages if they are located at foo/bin/macosx/contrib/3.1/
>>
>> So where are the mac binaries supposed to located in a CRAN-like repository so that they can be installed on a mac with the default install command?  And is there a way for a non-mac machine (i.e. our linux deploy server) to determine that directory other than contrib.url(,type='mac.binary) ?
>>
>> thanks for your help,
>> -skye
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>
>



[Rd] what is the current correct repos structure for mac osx binaries?
Skye Bender-deMoll