OK, thanks John and Ivar. I'll probably put in some effort towards building 
it myself, and wait for 0.3 binaries.

Thanks for the help,

Chris



On Thursday, January 23, 2014 5:35:16 PM UTC-8, John Myles White wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> Unfortunately it’s very difficult for us to support 0.2 anymore because of 
> the badly breaking Stats -> StatsBase renaming. We’d have to rewrite the 
> history of every repo to resolve this name change, so we chose to instead 
> push everything up to our current development branches. That change 
> unfortunately entirely deprecated Julia 0.2 support for DataArrays and 
> DataFrames.
>
> I’m hopeful we’ll standardize on a stable set of features for core 
> statistical libraries in the next six months. Once we all agree on core 
> infrastructure issues, it’ll be easier to provide backwards compatibility. 
> Right now we don’t have enough developers working on JuliaStats to both 
> support older releases and develop new ones.
>
>  — John
>
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 2:33 PM, Cgast <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote:
>
> Thanks Ivar. My incomplete description (which you have somewhat 
> offensively labeled as "weak") was intentionally so, to avoid hijacking the 
> thread with my own problem. With your encouragement, however, here is the 
> problem I'm having, which I suspect is related to the OP's problem: I 
> installed v0.2.0 (64-bit) this morning (build date appears to be 2013-11-16 
> 23:44 UTC), and have the following Pkg.status():
>
> Required packages:
>  - GLM                           0.2.2
> Additional packages:
>  - Blocks                        0.0.1
>  - DataArrays                    0.1.0
>  - DataFrames                    0.5.0
>  - Distributions                 0.3.0
>  - GZip                          0.2.7
>  - NumericExtensions             0.3.6
>  - SortingAlgorithms             0.0.1
>  - StatsBase                     0.3.5
>
> using GLM gives me the following messages, terminating in an error:
>
> Warning: could not import Base.foldl into NumericExtensions
> Warning: could not import Base.foldr into NumericExtensions
> Warning: could not import Base.sum! into NumericExtensions
> Warning: could not import Base.maximum! into NumericExtensions
> Warning: could not import Base.minimum! into NumericExtensions
> ERROR: Stats not found
>   in require at loading.jl:39
>
> at C:\~\.julia\GLM\src\GLM.jl:8
>
> Does this appear to be related to the previous problem? Does anyone have 
> any suggestions on how to fix it, or shall I wait for package authors to do 
> some updating?
>
> If a newer Julia version is required (which appears to be the suggestion 
> from the NumericExtensions github issues), are there no newer Windows 
> binaries available than v0.2.0? My corporate environment will make building 
> from source difficult, for a variety of reasons.
>
> After starting with a fresh installation and a clean .julia directory, 
> I've tried to install older versions of NumericExtensions (as suggested), 
> with the following results:
>
> Pkg.pin("NumericExtensions",v"0.2.20")
> ERROR: NumericExtensions is not a git repo
>   in pin at pkg/entry.jl:202
>
> and also:
>
> Pkg.pin("NumericExtensions",v"0.2.20")
> INFO: Installing NumericExtensions v0.3.6  # <---wrong version (latest)
> INFO: REQUIRE updated.
>
> Thanks in advance for your help,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thursday, January 23, 2014 1:45:38 PM UTC-8, Ivar Nesje wrote:
>>
>> Similar problem is a quite weak description.
>>
>> The previous problem was that a new version of a pakcage 
>> (NumericExtensions) was incorrectly marked as compatible with 0.2. This 
>> does not appear to be fixed, so a bump on Dahua Lin and John Myles White 
>> might be what is needed.
>>
>> kl. 21:32:14 UTC+1 torsdag 23. januar 2014 skrev Cgast følgende:
>>>
>>> Any update on this? Having similar problems on Windows 7 with a fresh 
>>> install just this morning.
>>>
>>> Seems to be related to some renaming of Stats vs. StatsBase? I've tried 
>>> fiddling with this myself within the packages, but haven't been able to 
>>> resolve it.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for all your help, and all the hard work getting Julia 
>>> to this point. 
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 10:15:55 AM UTC-8, John Myles White wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, we'll fix the packages to indicate which work with 0.2 and which 
>>>> don't.
>>>>
>>>>  -- John
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 15, 2014, at 9:52 AM, Corey Sparks <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> so, if i just wait for 0.3 things might get worked out?
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 11:26:56 AM UTC-6, John Myles White 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We've unfortunately done a bad job of keeping those packages 
>>>>> compatible with 0.2. I'll try to fix as much as I can today.
>>>>>
>>>>>  -- John
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 15, 2014, at 8:48 AM, Corey Sparks <[email protected]> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear List,
>>>>> I just installed Julia 0.2.0 last night and was trying to get the GLM 
>>>>> package going, when I try to load it and the RDatasets packages, I get:
>>>>>
>>>>> julia> using RDatasets, GLM
>>>>>
>>>>> Warning: could not import Base.foldl into NumericExtensions
>>>>>
>>>>> Warning: could not import Base.foldr into NumericExtensions
>>>>>
>>>>> Warning: could not import Base.sum! into NumericExtensions
>>>>>
>>>>> Warning: could not import Base.maximum! into NumericExtensions
>>>>>
>>>>> Warning: could not import Base.minimum! into NumericExtensions
>>>>>
>>>>> Warning: could not import Base.PAIRWISE_SUM_BLOCKSIZE into 
>>>>> NumericExtensions
>>>>>
>>>>> ERROR: TernaryFunctor not defined
>>>>>
>>>>>  in include at boot.jl:238
>>>>>
>>>>>  in include_from_node1 at loading.jl:114
>>>>>
>>>>>  in include at boot.jl:238
>>>>>
>>>>>  in include_from_node1 at loading.jl:114
>>>>>
>>>>>  in reload_path at loading.jl:140
>>>>>
>>>>>  in _require at loading.jl:58
>>>>>
>>>>>  in require at loading.jl:43
>>>>>
>>>>> at /Users/ozd504/.julia/GLM/src/lm.jl:22
>>>>>
>>>>> at /Users/ozd504/.julia/GLM/src/GLM.jl:76
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like something in GLM is broken, does anyone have advice on 
>>>>> this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you
>>>>>
>>>>> Corey
>>>>>
>>>>>
>

Reply via email to