[R-SIG-Mac] Can't get help.start() to work.

[Peter Cowan]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Rolf Turner <r.turner at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> On 29/10/2009, at 5:26 PM, Peter Cowan wrote:
>
>        <snip>
>
>> I think this has been mentioned by others, but you seem to be making
>> life difficult for yourself.
>
>        I beg to differ.  I don't think that ***I*** have done
>        anything to make life difficult for myself.
>
>> When you install R on a recent mac
>
>        If by ``recent mac'' you mean a relatively recent version of
>        Mac OS X, then this does not apply to me.  I'm still using
>        what is apparently known as ``Tiger''; Mac OS X 10.4.11.
>
>> you essentially get two versions, one for 32bit and one for 64bit.  These
>> are not compatible w/ each other (and no amount of effort would ever
>> make them so).  The installer (2.10.0 IIRC) installs in addition a GUI
>> for each R.app (32bit) and R64.app (64bit).  The default when
>> launching R in the terminal with Snow Leopard appears to be 64bit.
>
>        But I'm *not* using Snow Leopard; I'm using Tiger.

Mea culpa, I missed that point, and should have read more carefully.
My apologies to the whole list for making noise.  You can ignore the
bit about 64bit R and look forward to using it in the future.

>> You can check this by opening the Activity Monitor application and
>> looking for the R process.
>
>        Had a look.  Can't see ***anything*** about 32 bit vs. 64 bit.
>        The activity monitor just says ``R''.
>
>> If you install or build packages using the
>> default terminal version of R you *MUST* use R64.app for the packages
>> to work properly.  If built 64bit they must be run 64bit.  Your error
>> message say you are trying to load a package in 32bit R (probably
>> R.app) that have been install/build w/ 64bit R (the terminal).  I
>> recommend that you stick w/ one computer architecture (in this case
>> terminal and R64.app might work well for you).
>
>        Sorry to be a bit thick, but I don't quite follow this.
>        Are you saying that the only way for me to get R for my
>        machine now is to use a pre-built binary; that I ***can't***
>        build from source?  This would seem to be so since:
>
>        * you are saying that if I build from source then I *have*
>        to use 64 bit R

That's not what I was saying.  You can build the source and it will
build as 32bit, but there's no reason for you to build the source, why
would you want to?

>
>        * but I have been told that I ***cannot*** use 64 bit R with
>        Tiger.

Yes, my error.

>        I guess that I can live with having to use pre-built binaries.
>        Now that I know where to *get* a 32 bit binary, that's fine.
>        The only reason I tried to build from source was because the
>        2.10.0 binary on CRAN was 64 bit and that won't work under
>        ``Tiger''.
>
>        I could also try to get my employer to upgrade me to Snow
>        Leopard, but my chances .....
>
>        Anyway ... I now have the 32 bit binary build, which I downloaded
>        from the r.research.att web site, installed.  So how or in what
>        way am I mixing architectures?  (I also downloaded the 2.10.0
>        32 bit GUI from the r.research.att web site.  So all should be
>        in harmony, should it not?)
>
>>>       This is getting ridiculous.  Everything I try engenders
>>> another error and another fiasco.  Things have become too complex and
>>> intricate.  IMHO too much effort has been expended on implementing
>>> gee-whiz facilities for the super-clever or GUI facilities for the
>>> retarded at the expense of simple usability for the ordinary middle of
>>> the road user.
>>
>> I would gently suggest that this is not the best attitude to display
>> when trying to get help from volunteers.  I understand that you are
>> frustrated, but keep in mind that Simon and the other core developers
>> have expended far far more time that you've lost due to your
>> frustrations so that we could all have R.
>
>        They were doing it of their own choosing.  I have had my
>        frustrations forced upon me, since I need to get R working
>        properly in order to get on with what I'm being paid to do.

Again I fully understand you frustration, everyone has difficult times
getting things to work at one time or another.   It's annoying when
your "tools" break.  However, no one is forcing you to upgrade to
2.10.0 are they?  Nor are the developers of R forcing you to use it.
Take your anger out the on the people forcing you to use software
released three days ago on an operating system released 4 years ago.


>        Furthermore ***they*** understand what's going; I don't!!!
>
>> Furthermore, the changes
>> that are riling you at the moment are as much (if not more so) a
>> result of the changes that Apple has made w/ Snow Leopard.
>
>        Well, that's different!!! :-)
>
>                cheers,
>
>                        Rolf Turner
>
> ######################################################################
> Attention:This e-mail message is privileged and confidential. If you are not
> theintended recipient please delete the message and notify the sender.Any
> views or opinions presented are solely those of the author.
>
> This e-mail has been scanned and cleared by
> MailMarshalwww.marshalsoftware.com
> ######################################################################
>