From ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk  Tue Mar 27 19:30:36 2012
From: ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk (Prof Brian Ripley)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 18:30:36 +0100
Subject: [Rd] Missing Windows binary for R-2.15RC?
In-Reply-To: <CAF42j23dLV5W-RrLrtu+mrGZVbQwX4WXFpzcK8Uw_6X0Ln881g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF42j20hrmjxoLwY=W=xmCuCAjjCvMipC0a0oYOtZPSF6E5cCg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7842_1332546773_4F6D0CD5_7842_8701_1_EACEB08BE443481683B79A7D796D43A9@Gandalf>
	<CAF42j20rZzkRUvSLH4z6v6ZVcdjjn6Azs1yWA-nnhWXL3rfXrw@mail.gmail.com>
	<885DBD479155497D9548FC35D83B64B2@Gandalf>
	<4F6DDFE5.7000803@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
	<4F6DF9CD.6030709@gmail.com>
	<9784221D-D031-4089-BBF2-54E32C9F767C@r-project.org>
	<22897_1332619661_4F6E298D_22897_15424_1_4F6E296C.3010101@gmail.com>
	<CAF42j23dLV5W-RrLrtu+mrGZVbQwX4WXFpzcK8Uw_6X0Ln881g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4F71F93C.8030600@stats.ox.ac.uk>

You should be capable of building R on Windows from the SVN sources or 
daily source tarballs.

After all, when (as often happens) BioC has an inconsistent set of 
source or binaries (like released packages depending on unreleased 
packages, on unreleased versions), the BioC core team tell me to get the 
sources from your SVN.

On 27/03/2012 17:48, Dan Tenenbaum wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Duncan Murdoch
> <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 12-03-24 2:31 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 24, 2012, at 12:43 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12-03-24 10:53 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24.03.2012 06:58, Daniel Nordlund wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Dan Tenenbaum [mailto:dtenenba at fhcrc.org]
>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 5:48 PM
>>>>>>> To: Daniel Nordlund
>>>>>>> Cc: r-devel at r-project.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Rd] Missing Windows binary for R-2.15RC?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Daniel Nordlund
>>>>>>> <djnordlund at frontier.com>      wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>> From: r-devel-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> project.org]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Behalf Of Dan Tenenbaum
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 12:21 PM
>>>>>>>>> To: r-devel at r-project.org
>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Rd] Missing Windows binary for R-2.15RC?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The page
>>>>>>>>> http://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/rtest.html
>>>>>>>>> has a link to:
>>>>>>>>> http://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/R-2.15.0rc-win.exe
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, clicking on that link gives a 404 "Object not found' error.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> FYI.
>>>>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I experienced the same error you did using the link you provided.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    However, if you use the CRAN mirror hosted by YOUR organization, you
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> get the file. :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think so:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://cran.fhcrc.org/bin/windows/base/R-2.15.0rc-win.exe
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gives me a 404 as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't look closely enough at what you were asking for (RC versus
>>>>>> beta).  R-2.15RC may not have been up-loaded yet.  However, I just
>>>>>> downloaded it from the original link that was posted, so it appears to be
>>>>>> available now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It may have happened that the scripts generated the webpages before the
>>>>> binary was built and checked (since "beta" became "rc" yesterday).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, they need manual tweaking at the conversion, and I did it after the
>>>> first upload.
>>>>
>>>> If this happens again (which is pretty likely), you can manually download
>>>> the previous version by editing the URL to put in "alpha" in place of
>>>> "beta", or "beta" in place of "rc".
>>>>
>>>
>>> ... or have a fixed name instead (on OS X we just use 2.15-branch which is
>>> unambiguous). For the record I find it extremely annoying that even the
>>> installation target name changes in the installer - I keep having to change
>>> it to R-2.15 all the time, because I don't see why you would want to have
>>> alpha/beta/rc/release of the same R version installed in separate
>>> directories by default  - but that may be just me ;). To a lesser degree the
>>> same applies to patch versions, but since those are released I could see an
>>> argument for that, even though in practice I think it is not useful either
>>> (because typically you just want to upgrade and not another copy).
>>
>>
>> I'm neutral about the name changes, but I don't think any of this is enough
>> of a problem to be worth the time to fix.  If someone else wants to do it,
>> then I'd be happy to let you take over.
>>
>
> Thanks all of you for looking into this. Bioconductor usually needs
> the binaries as soon as they are available so if there is a
> sustainable way to solve this, we'd appreciate it very much.
>
> Dan
>
>
>>
>> Duncan Murdoch
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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



[Rd] Missing Windows binary for R-2.15RC?
Prof Brian Ripley