From edd @end|ng |rom deb|@n@org  Tue Feb 11 00:07:19 2025
From: edd @end|ng |rom deb|@n@org (Dirk Eddelbuettel)
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 17:07:19 -0600
Subject: [Rd] binary R packages for GNU/Linux
In-Reply-To: <CABFfbXv7sid-Gq+aGD-QWR0zQr0rOH_0_LBGEsu2_neBTjGCng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <01020194ef1ddab7-7ce660cf-1bd2-4d56-9426-3d3930019d6a-000000@eu-west-1.amazonses.com>
 <45B7CFB4-A9F9-48EA-9B68-5CEA81B2F91D@R-project.org>
 <01020194ef842fd9-d0ae4ebf-98bb-48ea-be9d-f72bff73eda8-000000@eu-west-1.amazonses.com>
 <26537.64093.228457.76824@rob.eddelbuettel.com>
 <CALEXWq3NWC+ygA+sibqE1VdF8rEsnjvYx8dqR-xsj3JdVudYag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN_1p9xrJd_YHVOJ0i8H4YzOsGg7K5mSZWcShs_VHPMDvDSDpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <26538.10265.377602.143676@rob.eddelbuettel.com>
 <71866055-9368-40A9-A139-B2772D73AF41@R-project.org>
 <CABFfbXv7sid-Gq+aGD-QWR0zQr0rOH_0_LBGEsu2_neBTjGCng@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <26538.34471.622699.127451@rob.eddelbuettel.com>


On 10 February 2025 at 23:19, Jeroen Ooms wrote:
| The "naked binaries" are widely used, and therefore probably useful to
| many folks, me included. Some standardisation on paths would be
| incredibly useful, even if CRAN would not offer such binaries, other
| repositories could.

Sure, but naked binaries can (and do) break more often i.e. real example from
just last week in another project p3m served a stringr dependency via a
stringi binary with a wrong libicu* outside of the particular release,
breaking.  That simply cannot and hence will not happen at r2u.

But choice is good. If people want to manually manage their system
dependencies they surely, they can also outsource it to another layer. As you
say, all trade-offs and if you are happy with naked binaries more power to
you. I prefer the proper integration and that's what I built. 

Dirk

-- 
dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org



[Rd] binary R packages for GNU/Linux
Dirk Eddelbuettel