Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On 27 February 2018 at 06:34, José Abílio Matoswrote: > On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 03.10.31 WET Max Pyziur wrote: > > > ggplot2, tibble, tidyr dplyr. They seem to be popular and becoming more > > > integral to R. > > > > > > As for the point about 435 on Ubuntu vs the ~140 on Fedora: I assume > those > > > 435 are reflective of popularity, frequency of usage, and maintenance. It > > > would be ridiculous to put all 6,000 CRAN packages into the Fedora eco > > > system. > > > > > > But consider perl and the number of packages that have been rpm'd, even > > > though some are close to stale. The benefit of having a package is that > it > > > is built with the whole distro in mind. > > > This has pros and cons. Pro is that you can install packages without having to find and install supporting libraries. Con is that newer packages may require versions of supporting packages that are newer than the version in the distro. > If you install packages local to a user, then they might not/probably are > > > not available to other users (but to engage in self argument: how many > > > other "users" have access to your own systems - desktop & laptop?) > > > At work we have an operational system with multiple users. The current version uses a bare C++ library, but the same library is wrapped by an R package which is far easier to use than a system where every change needs a C++ compiler. The operational system uses a number of very large 3rd party applications, including R, each expecting specific versions of libraries. Getting all these applications to play nicely is difficult. A few years ago, many of the potential conflicts were avoided by static linking. The recent trend in which every application "calls home" combined with transitions to https has caused many developers to abandon static linking, so there are more now more conflicts than ever before. The conflicts are not just differing versions of libraries, there are many libraries (e.g., the proj4 projections) that provide data files. Some applications provide non-standard versions of these data files, and expect users to set an environment variable that instructs the library to the "special" versions of the data files. This breaks all the applications that were developed to work with the standard data files. There are people looking to address some of these issues using lightweight virtualization, but at present those techniques are limited to ad-hoc projects and testing. > > Sure, there is little challenge to installing R packages using > > > install.packages("SomePackageName"); my concern is more for the sake of > > > consistency: if perl, python, php, etc., have their modules/function > > > libraries built for Fedora, why not R? > > > > > > Curious, not kvetching, > > > > > > MP > > > > BTW I think that CRAN now is over 10 000 packages so even 435 is less than > 5%. > > > > I maintain some of those packages in Fedora, and from practical experience > I > can tell you that one of the problems when packaging a new R package into > Fedora is that every time you start you have to unravel all the > dependencies. > Sometimes you need to go 5 levels deeps, with a net result of ~40/50 new > packages that need to be added before adding the package you interested in. > > > How often does a new R package require a version or configuration of a library that differs from what the distro provides? Libraries like hdf5 and gdal have many configuration options. In my experience, distro versions often omit options needed for my work (remote sensing). Too often you can easily install an R package, only to discover that it fails for your "use case" and has to be rebuilt using non-distro libraries. > Recently some of the packages required to have the packages you referred > above > are starting to show in Fedora. But that is a process that takes time and > requires energy. > > > > I presented a talk in useR 2008: > > https://jamatos.fedorapeople.org/talk-user2008.pdf > > > > FWIW this problem is not specific to R the same happens for python. There > are > packages where unraveling new dependencies is also a problem. > The talk mentions some of the issues with "suggested" packages. Of course, the first question is whether all the "suggested" packages can be built using R install.packages(). Creating distro packages is labor intensive. Packages that are very widely used should be in distro packages, but so should packages that are less widely used but still popular and which require extra steps to build (e.g., rely on 3rd party libraries so need dev packages outside the normal "build-essential" lists , or which don't reliable detect installed distro packages). It would be nice to have such packages identified on CRAN so package developers can work on the issues. Many large organizations provide managed platforms for large applications. These platforms get distro packages, are are generally expected to have a 5-year lifetime.
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 03.10.31 WET Max Pyziur wrote: > ggplot2, tibble, tidyr dplyr. They seem to be popular and becoming more > integral to R. > > As for the point about 435 on Ubuntu vs the ~140 on Fedora: I assume those > 435 are reflective of popularity, frequency of usage, and maintenance. It > would be ridiculous to put all 6,000 CRAN packages into the Fedora eco > system. > > But consider perl and the number of packages that have been rpm'd, even > though some are close to stale. The benefit of having a package is that it > is built with the whole distro in mind. > > If you install packages local to a user, then they might not/probably are > not available to other users (but to engage in self argument: how many > other "users" have access to your own systems - desktop & laptop?) > > Sure, there is little challenge to installing R packages using > install.packages("SomePackageName"); my concern is more for the sake of > consistency: if perl, python, php, etc., have their modules/function > libraries built for Fedora, why not R? > > Curious, not kvetching, > > MP BTW I think that CRAN now is over 10 000 packages so even 435 is less than 5%. I maintain some of those packages in Fedora, and from practical experience I can tell you that one of the problems when packaging a new R package into Fedora is that every time you start you have to unravel all the dependencies. Sometimes you need to go 5 levels deeps, with a net result of ~40/50 new packages that need to be added before adding the package you interested in. Recently some of the packages required to have the packages you referred above are starting to show in Fedora. But that is a process that takes time and requires energy. I presented a talk in useR 2008: https://jamatos.fedorapeople.org/talk-user2008.pdf FWIW this problem is not specific to R the same happens for python. There are packages where unraveling new dependencies is also a problem. Regards, -- José Matos ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On 21.02.2018, Max Pyziur wrote: > I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than Fedora > (more R deb packages than R rpm packages). See https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/available_packages_by_name.html There's a plethora of different packages. You can either install them with the "install.packages()" function or directly from R-studio, which is what I'm using. https://www.rstudio.com/products/rstudio/download/#download ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [Off-topic] Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On 02/21/18 11:14, Max Pyziur wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Todd Zullinger wrote: > > [...] >> >> # Non-R packages: >> fonts-KOI8-R.noarch >> fonts-KOI8-R-100dpi.noarch >> fonts-KOI8-R-75dpi.noarch > > Wow! Does someone still use KOI8-R in a universe of UTF8 and Unicode? > > That might be like asking "Does anyone use big5 or GB2312 in the UTF8 and Unicode world?" And the answer would be Yes. The Taiwan Government still uses big5 in some cases. Some sites in Taiwan still use big5. And in the PRC the Government there still uses GB2312. -- A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Off-topic] Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Todd Zullinger wrote: [...] # Non-R packages: fonts-KOI8-R.noarch fonts-KOI8-R-100dpi.noarch fonts-KOI8-R-75dpi.noarch Wow! Does someone still use KOI8-R in a universe of UTF8 and Unicode? perl-Tree-R.noarch There's an R SIG for Fedora, which looks like it's been quiet since October. Perhaps some folks interested in R packaging would be welcome there? https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-fedora MP p...@brama.com ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Matthew Miller wrote: On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 06:28:57PM -0500, Max Pyziur wrote: Greetings, I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than Fedora (more R deb packages than R rpm packages). Is there a rationale for this? I'm not sure about R in specific, but generally the rationale is "no one did it". Are there particular packages that you're interested in? ggplot2, tibble, tidyr dplyr. They seem to be popular and becoming more integral to R. As for the point about 435 on Ubuntu vs the ~140 on Fedora: I assume those 435 are reflective of popularity, frequency of usage, and maintenance. It would be ridiculous to put all 6,000 CRAN packages into the Fedora eco system. But consider perl and the number of packages that have been rpm'd, even though some are close to stale. The benefit of having a package is that it is built with the whole distro in mind. If you install packages local to a user, then they might not/probably are not available to other users (but to engage in self argument: how many other "users" have access to your own systems - desktop & laptop?) Sure, there is little challenge to installing R packages using install.packages("SomePackageName"); my concern is more for the sake of consistency: if perl, python, php, etc., have their modules/function libraries built for Fedora, why not R? Curious, not kvetching, MP ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
I have used R since 1997 (version 0.4) and Fedora since Fedora 1 (2003). Ubuntu which my wife used for 10-12 years (before she saw the light, as it were) can not even begin to match Fedora's support and user community. With regard to R: I prefer installing the packages using install.packages() inside R and update them using update.packages(). I feel that that is a better option for me. HTH, Best wishes, Ranjan On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 19:21:40 -0500 Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 06:28:57PM -0500, Max Pyziur wrote: > > Greetings, > > I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. > > I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than > > Fedora (more R deb packages than R rpm packages). > > Is there a rationale for this? > > I'm not sure about R in specific, but generally the rationale is "no > one did it". Are there particular packages that you're interested in? > > -- > Matthew Miller > <mat...@fedoraproject.org> > Fedora Project Leader > ___ > users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Important Notice: This mailbox is ignored: e-mails are set to be deleted on receipt. Please respond to the mailing list if appropriate. For those needing to send personal or professional e-mail, please use appropriate addresses. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On 20 February 2018 at 19:28, Max Pyziur <p...@brama.com> wrote: > > Greetings, > > I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. > > I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than > Fedora (more R deb packages than R rpm packages). > > Is there a rationale for this? > Counting the number of packages isn't worth the effort. R is used by many different communities, e.g., pharma, academia, etc. Within these communities, linux users tend to gravitate to the same platform and packages used in that community will get attention on that platform. Many R packages use external libraries, so user communities will insist that these libraries are packaged and usable. Ubuntu is a very popular distribution, so can be expected to have a wider range of user communities. You may, however, find that key libraries and R packages for your subject area are not current or have unreported bugs (because they are not heavily used). While you are learning R, any distro should provide basic packages. If your ultimate interest is in a specialized subject area, you need to look at the packages and support libraries being used in that field and check for packages of current versions. For advanced R users, the biggest issue is not R packages, but the presence of workable support libraries. If you suitable supporting libraries, it is generally very simple to install current R packages from the sources on CRAN. My work is in remote sensing and uses spatial statistics and images. A "mission critical" package from a national space agency was developed on Ubuntu, so I use Ubuntu but have often had to build some supporting libraries (gdal, hdf5, netcdf4) because the distro packages for these libraries were outdated or built with stripped own options that make them unusable for my work. This situation has improved over time, but just when I think the distro has caught up with my needs a new feature is introduced and I end up having to build support libraries from sources all over again. Building support libraries often gets into nitty gritty distro-specific details figuring out how to ensure that your R packages use the locally compiled libraires without creating conflicts with the distro-supplied versions of the packages. -- George N. White III ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
Max Pyziur wrote: > On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Ed Greshko wrote: >> On 02/21/18 07:28, Max Pyziur wrote: >>> I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. >>> >>> I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater >>> support for R than Fedora (more R deb packages than R >>> rpm packages). >>> >>> Is there a rationale for this? I'd presume that it's mostly that less folks have contributed R-based packages to Fedora. The only way to change that is for more folks interested in R to maintain packages in Fedora. :) >> I don't use R or Ubuntu. But I wonder if counting the number of packages is >> actually >> reflective of the level of support. Is there a one-to-one correspondence >> between deb >> and rpm packages and the distributions? >> >> I count 140 rpm's (R-*) packages on Fedora. This excludes the devel >> packages. How >> many more does Ubuntu have and what functionality do they provide that is >> missing >> from Fedora? >> >> With that info, I would think one could write a BZ against R requesting the >> missing >> pieces. Probably would get a better, more definitive answer that way. I'm not an R user either, so I could be wildly wrong here. But I believe that most of the different packages are extensions/modules/additional data files rather than than missing pieces of the core R software. Similar to CPAN for Perl modules, R has CRAN for R packages. (That's probably nothing new to either of you, but might be useful to someone casually following this thread.) There are 12,173 packages listed at https://cloud.r-project.org/web/packages/available_packages_by_name.html So I guess no distribution has much of it covered. ;) > I count about 435 on Ubuntu. To be fair, Ubuntu gets to build on top of the substantial work of Debian. For grins, I poked at the latest docker images from Debian, Ubuntu, and Fedora and came up with these numbers: # debian (docker.io/debian:latest) $ apt-get update $ apt-cache pkgnames | grep -ciw r 292 # ubuntu (docker.io/ubuntu:latest) $ apt-get update $ apt-cache pkgnames | grep -ciw r 365 # fedora (registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide) # (There are 42 '-devel' packages and 4 matches which are # not R packages.) $ dnf list available | grep -iw r | grep -cv -- -devel 167 # Non-R packages: fonts-KOI8-R.noarch fonts-KOI8-R-100dpi.noarch fonts-KOI8-R-75dpi.noarch perl-Tree-R.noarch There's an R SIG for Fedora, which looks like it's been quiet since October. Perhaps some folks interested in R packaging would be welcome there? https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-fedora -- Todd ~~ Most of one's life is one prolonged effort to prevent oneself thinking. -- Aldous Huxley signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [EXT] Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Max Pyziur wrote: I count about 435 on Ubuntu. fyi, MP -- Out of over 6000 packages available from CRAN alone, 435 is nothing. I dont believe the number of packages available from a distribution's repository is reflective of the level of support. R makes it extremely easy to install packages. Who needs all of CRAN to be available in a repository? It is simple enough to do a 'install.packages("BLAH"). What is important is R core and devel support, and to that point, both OSs are basically the same === Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail Cleveland Clinic is currently ranked as the No. 2 hospital in the country by U.S. News & World Report (2017-2018). Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for a complete listing of our services, staff and locations. Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Thank you. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 06:28:57PM -0500, Max Pyziur wrote: > Greetings, > I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. > I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than > Fedora (more R deb packages than R rpm packages). > Is there a rationale for this? I'm not sure about R in specific, but generally the rationale is "no one did it". Are there particular packages that you're interested in? -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Ed Greshko wrote: On 02/21/18 07:28, Max Pyziur wrote: I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than Fedora (more R deb packages than R rpm packages). Is there a rationale for this? I don't use R or Ubuntu. But I wonder if counting the number of packages is actually reflective of the level of support. Is there a one-to-one correspondence between deb and rpm packages and the distributions? I count 140 rpm's (R-*) packages on Fedora. This excludes the devel packages. How many more does Ubuntu have and what functionality do they provide that is missing from Fedora? With that info, I would think one could write a BZ against R requesting the missing pieces. Probably would get a better, more definitive answer that way. I count about 435 on Ubuntu. fyi, MP___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
On 02/21/18 07:28, Max Pyziur wrote: > I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. > > I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than Fedora > (more R > deb packages than R rpm packages). > > Is there a rationale for this? I don't use R or Ubuntu. But I wonder if counting the number of packages is actually reflective of the level of support. Is there a one-to-one correspondence between deb and rpm packages and the distributions? I count 140 rpm's (R-*) packages on Fedora. This excludes the devel packages. How many more does Ubuntu have and what functionality do they provide that is missing from Fedora? With that info, I would think one could write a BZ against R requesting the missing pieces. Probably would get a better, more definitive answer that way. -- A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
R as on Ubuntu and Fedora
Greetings, I've been learning R on both Fedora and Ubuntu. I've noticed that Ubuntu has considerably greater support for R than Fedora (more R deb packages than R rpm packages). Is there a rationale for this? Much thanks, Max Pyziur p...@brama.com ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org