I'm inclined to agree. Users are expecting that things they install manually will override the system default (if any).
Tom On Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:39 AM Iñaki Ucar <iu...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 17:17, José Abílio Matos <jama...@fc.up.pt> wrote: > > > > There was a thread this weekend in the fedora users' mailing list where > a user > > had problems updating R 4.0.2: > > > > "non-rpm R libraries not accessible now w R v 4.0.x" > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/us...@lists.fedoraproject.org/ > > thread/2FFST3GWZCNM45SX53VKB255TO4LOV4C/ > > I don't follow that list, but I see you have everything under control, > thanks. > > > TLDR; as far as I can see the user had installed (as root) a package > from cran > > and had installed the same package (R-here) from the Fedora repositories. > > > > Since the package were installed in different locations the package > installed > > by the user appeared first and thus it won regarding the Fedora package. > The > > only problem was that the other package was installed using R 3.6 and > thus the > > user had the warning that seemed confusing. > > > > Are there any kind of tools to pick these cases or this is one of those > corner > > cases that are not worth the trouble? > > IMO it's not worth the trouble. Users should never install packages as > root. That's it. This may sound harsh, but, if they do, then they > should know what they're doing, and it's their problem. This is like > the seals on the screws of an electronic device: we ship one > configuration that works; we simply cannot foresee the countless ways > to break it once you start tinkering with it. :) > > -- > Iñaki Úcar > > _______________________________________________ > R-SIG-Fedora mailing list > R-SIG-Fedora@r-project.org > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-fedora > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] _______________________________________________ R-SIG-Fedora mailing list R-SIG-Fedora@r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-fedora
