From pgilbert@bank-banque-canada.ca  Fri Jun  1 15:14:00 2001
From: pgilbert@bank-banque-canada.ca (Paul Gilbert)
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 10:14:00 -0400
Subject: [Rd] R-1.2.3: a small suggestion (PR#961)
References: <x2g0dlxj32.fsf@blueberry.kubism.ku.dk> <Pine.A41.4.33.0105311511510.12492-100000@homer15.u.washington.edu> <15127.13646.122849.533320@mithrandir.hornik.net> <x2ofs81vxk.fsf@blueberry.kubism.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <3B17A328.CE9D57EB@bank-banque-canada.ca>

>IF we drop the "easy package migration" aspect and just let people do
>separate installs with separate generation of site libraries, would we
>not be in the clear?

I think "easy package migration"  is a great objective, but I expect it is a serious
constraint sometimes. In some respects, as a user, reliable is more important. It is
easier to expect that you always have to re-build packages then to expect you don't
need to and then get surprised sometimes.  There are whole operating systems
dedicated to showing that "easy" can be very difficult when it doesn't work.

Please keep in mind that the problems don't always come just with different R
versions. I'm currently using two systems (Solaris 5.6 and 5.8)  with a shared nfs
file system and I find that R built on 5.8 does not work on 5.6.

(Also, please keep in mind that R is not always installed by someone with root
priveleges.)

Paul Gilbert

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


[Rd] R-1.2.3: a small suggestion (PR#961)
Paul Gilbert