From maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch  Wed Feb  7 14:57:37 2007
From: maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch (Martin Maechler)
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:57:37 +0100
Subject: [Rd] RPM support for package installation?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702061431080.754@hydra8.stat.cmu.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702061144390.754@hydra8.stat.cmu.edu>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0702061800330.1387@auk.stats>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0702061431080.754@hydra8.stat.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: <17865.56017.573249.622745@stat.math.ethz.ch>

>>>>> "Rhiannon" == Rhiannon L Weaver <rlweaver at stat.cmu.edu>
>>>>>     on Tue, 6 Feb 2007 14:35:31 -0500 (EST) writes:

    Rhiannon> Hi,

    Rhiannon> Thanks for the clarification.  As long as the
    Rhiannon> admins don't mind (which I guess they won't
    Rhiannon> because it means they won't have to build RPMs or
    Rhiannon> binaries), I will be okay with just using local
    Rhiannon> versions of the libraries.  

You will be using local version of the  ** packages **
by installing them into your own library.  Try to be careful not
to confuse the two terms.

    Rhiannon> versions of the libraries.  I just wanted to make
    Rhiannon> sure I wasn't missing something obvious (which is
    Rhiannon> probably pretty likely in situations like this).
    Rhiannon> Thanks again for your help.

    Rhiannon> -Rhiannon


    Rhiannon> On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:

    >> The problem is the speed with which R packages change.
    >> My dept considered this, and decided against.  There have
    >> been something like 200 new versions of CRAN packages
    >> already this year.
    >> 
    >> Even if we provided automated wrappers to make source
    >> RPMs, someone would still have to build the binary RPMs
    >> for your (unstated) architecture and then install it.
    >> Unless you use very few packages nor sysadmin is going to
    >> be happy with this approach.
    >> 
    >> It really is quite easy to have your own library and
    >> install packages there, and it will become easier in
    >> 2.5.0.  Your 'workaround' is the preferred solution for
    >> many sites including ours, although for our most popular
    >> architectures we also run a central site-library of
    >> popular packages (e.g.  those used for teaching here).
    >> 
    >> 
    >> On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Rhiannon L Weaver wrote:
    >> 
    >>> Hello,
    >>> 
    >>> Tech question, I hope this has not been addressed
    >>> before.  I searched help archives and looked for online
    >>> help but came up empty-handed.
    >>> 
    >>> My question is: (short version) Is there a RPM-supported
    >>> version of update.packages() for use with updating
    >>> package libraries on managed multi-user Linux networks?
    >>> 
    >>> Details:
    >>> 
    >>> I put in a request for updating the version of R on one
    >>> of the hosts on my work Unix network, which is managed
    >>> by our IT department.  Current version is 2.1.0; I asked
    >>> them to update to 2.4.1. The core update installed and I
    >>> was able to test it, but the update had trouble loading
    >>> the package "Matrix" for use with "lme4".  I don't
    >>> recall the specific error (will check it out when the
    >>> new version gets re-installed again and I can document
    >>> it).  Other packages (lme, wavethresh, MASS) seemed to
    >>> load without problems.
    >>> 
    >>> I think the Matrix problem can be solved by running
    >>> update.packages() but when I requested the admin to
    >>> update packages for the new version, they said that they
    >>> need to do this via an RPM.  Specifically (and I'm not a
    >>> network guru so my advice may not be entirely accurate):
    >>> 
    >>> me: I think if you have admin access you should be able
    >>> to update the R packages by using the command
    >>> update.packages() from within a running, updated version
    >>> of R, and it will automatically check packages for new
    >>> versions and update them.
    >>> 
    >>> admin: But this method moves us to an unsustainable host
    >>> with locally installed packages.  The add-on packages
    >>> need to be installed via an RPM.
    >>> 
    >>> As I understand it, RPM is like a kind of makefile for
    >>> Linux machines.  The help mentions need of -devel or
    >>> -dev files for RPM installations and updates of the core
    >>> software; is there a similar avenue I can point my admin
    >>> to for package updates?  I'm not afraid of a little
    >>> Linux, but I fear I am a bit out of my element on this
    >>> one.
    >>> 
    >>> Currently the workaround is for them to install the new
    >>> version and for me to download and maintain packages
    >>> locally.
    >>> 
    >>> Thanks very much for your time, -Rhiannon
    >>> 
    >>> ______________________________________________
    >>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
    >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
    >>> 
    >> 
    >> -- 
    >> Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk Professor of
    >> Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
    >> University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South
    >> Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax:
    >> +44 1865 272595
    >> 

    Rhiannon> ______________________________________________
    Rhiannon> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
    Rhiannon> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel



[Rd] RPM support for package installation?
Martin Maechler