[Rd] dependencies on system packages
edd at debian.org
Fri Feb 4 19:24:16 CET 2011
On 4 February 2011 at 10:01, Simon Urbanek wrote:
| thanks for you comments .
| On Feb 4, 2011, at 3:18 AM, Claudia Beleites wrote:
| > Dear all,
| > From the writing extensions manual:
| > "Other dependencies (external to the R system) should be listed in the ‘SystemRequirements’ field, possibly amplified in a separate README file."
| > I guess one problem is the user may not realize that the -dev version is needed, and just sees libxml2 installed but the R package installation stopping with the respective error.
| I'd argue that if a user attempts to install a package from sources instead
| of using the distribution binaries, he should know what he's doing as there
| is much more involved (proper tools, usually a different library location
| etc.). And anyone who knows what he's doing also knows that -dev packages
| are needed (at the latest when the installation fails you remember ;)). If
| he doesn't then it should give him a clue that he may want to use something
| else (and especially Linux users should know better ;)).
| Clearly, it doesn't prevent users from doing stupid things and I completely
| agree with you that the README should have the instructions as far as the
| developer knows. And as a package developer you'll learn soon enough when
| people start complaining ;).
I respectfully disagree.
Based on a number of years of supporting users on Linux where people install
frequently from source, I can assure you that a rather large number of people
fails. Not everybody is fluent with compilers, knows about libraries and
their interdependencies, or can even read configure error messages. We all
see the r-help messages (or the traffic on the SIG lists).
People want to use the wealth of software that is CRAN, and we should help
them. I have also been involved in by now two attempts to overcome this in
an automated fashion via cran2deb. We had that working somewhat reliably
until parts of the infrastructure misteriously self-destructed (a large
sqlite table) right when I visited Vienna, and are now in a rewrite which may
be never ending (for lack of resources). There was a lot of interest for it
when it worked, and there is ongoing interest right now (as a few guys from
across Europe just met last weekend to try to use for BioC builds).
There were also folks from other distros who tried something similar. What
Jeroen suggested is along those lines with the needed meta-data. Whether we
make it per-package (as per Jeroen's idea) or 'per-repo-distro-pair' (which
is what cran2deb does) is a detail.
We need to address this: With 2600+ packages and continued growth, manually
wading through README is not good enough. We should do better. Resources
(time, money, servers, ...) would help. Maybe one day someone with more time
can fold this into a proper sub-project of a larger grant application. It
would be worth, and I would try to help, time permitting.
| > Giving the package name for specific distributions is of course polite (if the developer knows it). As developer you may also put into the README that the package's mailing list/forum/wiki/... contains information and ask the user to enter the package name on his distro if it is not already there.
| > my 2 ct
| > Claudia
| > Am 04.02.2011 04:48, schrieb Simon Urbanek:
| >> Jeroen,
| >> On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:31 PM, Jeroen Ooms wrote:
| >>> Many R packages depend on some unix libraries that are not part of most
| >>> default installations. I often spend a significant amount of time figuring
| >>> out where to get the appropriate libraries for compiling these packages,
| >>> after they give some vague error of something missing. I was wondering why
| >>> there is no formal system of specifying non-R dependencies in the
| >>> DESCRIPTION file. If this would be the case, then during the installation of
| >>> an R package, the user could be prompted to install required system packages
| >>> (if they have appropriate privileges).
| >>> So for example:
| >>> Package: XML
| >>> Version: 3.2-0
| >>> Depends: R (>= 1.2.0), methods, utils
| >>> Depends-debian: libxml2-dev
| >>> Depends-ubuntu: libxml2-dev
| >>> Depends-redhat: libxml2-devel
| >>> Depends-suse: libxml2-devel
| >>> etc.
| >>> This might make life for many people just a little easier. If they are root
| >>> and the package is in their system repositories, than it will install
| >>> automatically. If not, at least they know for which package to look, or
| >>> request their sys admin to install.
| >> Well, there is already such system in place and it is the corresponding descriptions in the distributions. Obviously as an author of the package I don't care what any particular Linux distribution uses as a name for the needed dependencies as the corresponding chaos is distribution-specific. The only person who can reasonably determine the dependencies is the maintainer of the distribution and that's what they do and as a user of the above mentioned distributions you should be thankful to them. Fortunately, normal users don't have to worry about it as major distributions already come with a large set of R packages resolving all dependencies. Hence I don't see any reason why this should have anything to do with the DESCRIPTION file. The improvements I could think of would be a parseable entry or a canonical pointer to dependency sources, but that's a whole another story.
| >> Cheers,
| >> Simon
| >> ______________________________________________
| >> 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
| R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
Dirk Eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com
More information about the R-devel