thomas.friedrichsmeier at ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Tue Apr 24 13:29:31 UTC 2018
On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:27:07 +0200
meik michalke <meik.michalke at uni-duesseldorf.de> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 24. April 2018, 11:17:18 CEST schrieb Thomas
> > I have just pushed a commit to offer R_LIBS_USER as standard
> > installation location, instead of ~/.rkward/library. The advantages
> > are that
> > a) This in line with what standalone R does.
> > b) The directory is versioned, so packages built for R 3.4 will not
> > be seen by R 3.5 (and vice-versa).
> is that limited to certain platforms or coming with 3.5.0? i don't
> see any versioning in my R_LIBS_USER.
Hm. It should be set from Renviron (and since a _long_ time). Any
chance you have messed with that?
Of course it would also be really easy to offer ~/.rkward/library/3.5
(etc.) as a default location, and in fact that is what happens as a
fallback, when R_LIBS_USER is completely empty. But that would defeat
I suppose a) will have priority over b).
> > One remaining concern is what to do with an existing
> > ~/.rkward/library. I do want to continue supporting custom
> > installation locations, but probably if ~/.rkward/library is found
> > among those, RKWard should probably suggest to remove it?
> it could try to "move" it to R_LIBS_USER, by freshly installing all
> packages to the new location, and only remove ~/.rkward/library if
> that was successful. without the versioning mentioned above it could
> also actually move packages directly, if the targets do not exist yet.
> or is that asking for trouble?
It's simply asking for quite a deal of work for something users will be
faced with once (arguably a similar situation will then come up once a
year for new releases of R).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the rkward-devel