[R] strange behavior with R.dll

[Joshua Wiley]

On Oct 12, 2011, at 17:23, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11-10-12 7:54 PM, Joshua Wiley wrote:
>> I regularly have the R.dll removed.  AFAI can tell, it depends partly on how aggressive a heuristic level you have chosen, in part I think related to the number of users.  In any case you can restore it and set a rule to have it ignored.  I suppose you could tell symantec, but it's never been enough of a nuisance to me to set my own rules to bother trying to contact them.
> 
> From your own builds, or the pre-built binaries?

Pre-built binaries....I think, though it seems like it happened from a compiled r devel at some point (memory of the exact versions is a bit hazy, and recently I am careful to make sure to say the file is safe now).

> 
> Duncan Murdoch
> 
>> Josh
>> 
>> On Oct 12, 2011, at 12:09, Duncan Murdoch<murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 12/10/2011 3:03 PM, Erin Hodgess wrote:
>>>> Dear R People:
>>>> 
>>>> I am using R-2.13.2 on a Windows 7 machine.
>>>> 
>>>> I compiled from source on 32 bit a couple of weeks ago and the R.dll
>>>> got removed by my anti-virus software.
>>>> 
>>>> Same thing on 64 bit today.
>>>> 
>>>> Is anyone having this problem, please?
>>>> 
>>>> I'm using Norton AV.
>>> 
>>> I haven't heard of this particular problem before.  Generally the problems we have had have been with other Antivirus programs finding false positives in our pre-compiled distributions.
>>> 
>>> Duncan Murdoch
>>> 
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>>> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>> 
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>