On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 09:22PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > Hi, > > there are options to have clean room dependency installation for debian and > rpm systems: debian's pbuilder and fedora's mock. > > These would make the whole dependency installation by puppet obsolete. > Everything would be installed on demand only and thrown away afterwards. > > If I have enough time I will look into integrating this into our toolchain > (at least optionally)
That'd be quite cool, thanks! I wonder where it leaves Susa? Cos > > Am 04.10.2015 um 18:54 schrieb RJ Nowling <[email protected]>: > > > > Hi Olaf, > > > > I agree -- I'm not suggesting we should package R. Spark's R support uses > > R as installed through system packages. However, to build R support in > > Spark requires that the build machines have R installed, which adds a very > > large number of packages to the toolchain. I don't want to approve a patch > > to add R without getting some community feedback. > > > > So how do you feel about installing R whenever we need to build Bigtop? :) > > > > Thanks, > > RJ > > > > On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Olaf Flebbe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> HI RJ, > >> > >> Regarding R : > >> > >> We should not provide an R of our own, rather integrate in distribution > >> supplied packages (i.e. R / R-devel from EPEL for Centos/Fedora , > >> r-base-dev on an debian distro, i am sure there is something on opensuse > >> build service too) > >> > >> Olaf > >> > >> > >> > >>> Am 04 Oct 2015 um 14:28 schrieb RJ Nowling <[email protected]>: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> The patch for updating Spark to 1.5.1 also involves adding R as a > >>> dependency. R brings in 150+ packages beyond the current build > >>> requirements. (They can all be added just by installing the R package so > >>> installation is easy.) > >>> > >>> If everyone is fine with this, I'll continue the review of Jonathan's > >> patch > >>> and try to get that in. There are three commits -- Spark to 1.5.1, > >>> cosmetic changes, and updates to puppet. I'll leave the Puppet patch as > >>> separate since I'm not in a great position to review it. > >>> > >>> If not, do we want to disable building Spark with R for now? We could > >> add > >>> a later patch which adds Spark R and updates the toolchain, etc. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> RJ > >> > >> >
