2006/4/26, Uwe Ligges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Pfaff, Bernhard Dr. wrote:
> >>>>>>"BernPf" == Pfaff, Bernhard Dr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>>> on Wed, 26 Apr 2006 08:28:34 +0100 writes:
> >
> >
> > BernPf> Dear Andy, Uwe and remaining list subscribers,
> > BernPf> now, coming closer to the evil's root. Yesterday, I source
> > compiled on a
> > BernPf> Linux box at home and the result is the same behaviour as
> > pointed out
> > BernPf> below. This is regardless of the package version of 'urca'.
> > Aside of
> > BernPf> 'urca', other packages that have Imports/Depends entries in
> > the
> > BernPf> DESCRIPTION to packages that are shipped within the standard
> > library of
> > BernPf> R show the warning too, e.g. fMultivar, VLMC, to name but a
> > few.
> > BernPf> I do have set on both OS, i.e. Windows and Linux, a second
> > library tree
> > BernPf> in Renviron.site with R-LIBS. If I comment this out and do a
> > reinstall
> > BernPf> of the packages, i.e. the packages are now installed in the
> > standard
> > BernPf> library, the warning does not show up any longer. Has
> > something changed
> > BernPf> with regard to additional libraries that slipped my notice
> > by upgrading
> > BernPf> to version 2.3.0?
> >
> > I don't think so.
> > I ***NEVER*** install a package into the standard library.
> > We have all CRAN packages in a different library,
> > (and Bioconductor too) and I typically use about 6 library (paths),
> > and I don't have your problem.
> >
> > I only get your warning if I get a version of a package that was
> > installed previous to 2.3.0 (or it's alpha / beta / rc ) versions.
> >
> > BernPf> Is it possible that during startup the environment is
> > handeld/passed
> > BernPf> differently for standard and additional libraries? Would
> > this odd
> > BernPf> behaviour qualify as a bug?
> >
> > If it was general, yes, but I think it's not.
> >
> >
> > Hello Martin and all others involved in this thread,
> >
> > thank you very much for your time and patience. After having updated the
> > packages in the standard library, too, the warning message does indeed
> > not show up any longer by issuing the command library(urca) and similar
> > with other packages. Just out of curiosity, I wonder what has changed in
> > these packages (i.e. nlme, foreign, cluster and VR got updated) from
> > downloading the '.exe' or the tarball in the official 2.3.0 release up
> > to now?
>
>
> For sure you got (or still had in front of your R_LIBS path) packages
> that were compiled for R < 2.3.0! That's it. Very simple.
>
> Uwe Ligges
>
>
> > Best,
> > Bernhard
> > *****************************************************************
> > Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this message,
> > and any attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged
> > material. It is intended solely for the person(s) or entity to
> > which it is addressed. Any review, retransmission, dissemination,
> > or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by
> > persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is
> > prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the
> > sender and delete the material from any computer.
> > *****************************************************************
>
> ______________________________________________
> [email protected] mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
I'm happy the problem was solved. I had the same problem with a package of
mines (not on CRAN). The problem was an imported package that was compiled
for R-2.2.0.
Tnx all for solving my problem just before posting it on the list:D
Antonio, Fabio Di Narzo.
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
