[R-SIG-Mac] Installing packages with type="source" instead of the default binary?
Prof Brian Ripley
ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Mon Sep 9 12:28:58 CEST 2013
On 09/09/2013 10:56, Rainer M Krug wrote:
> I am using Snow Leopard and I can compile packages (I have all tools
> installed) but I am asking myself:
> Is there an advantage to using type="source" instead of the binary
> install of the packages? For certain packages it makes sense to have
> fine grained control to link to certain versions of C libraries
> (e.g. rgdal), but is there a general advantage of compiling locally?
There is an advantage if you run multiple versions of R and want to
share a library directory. The CRAN binary versions are tied to the
- for the majority of packages (which have no compiled code), there is
almost no advantage in installing from source, but also very little loss
(you need no extra tools).
- The CRAN binaries are built for 3.0.0 I believe, and certainly not
re-built for patch versions. For a very few packages it is advantageous
to use the latest patch version (I am thinking of some issues with
non-Sweave vignettes in recent history, but there have been other issues).
- You might well want to use different external C/C++/Fortran software,
and you may even need to do so or use a different compiler (there are
packages which install with clang but not llvm-gcc and v.v.).
> Or is that simply a leftover from my Linux days, that I prefer locally
> compiled packages?
> R-SIG-Mac mailing list
> R-SIG-Mac at r-project.org
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
More information about the R-SIG-Mac