> On May 11, 2017, at 1:10 PM, Christopher Jones
> wrote:
>
>
>> On 11 May 2017, at 5:56 pm, Carlo Tambuatco wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On May 11, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Jones
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would suggest the opposite instead. Remove your external R and just use
>>> the MacPorts ver
> On 11 May 2017, at 5:56 pm, Carlo Tambuatco wrote:
>
>
>> On May 11, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Jones
>> wrote:
>>
>> I would suggest the opposite instead. Remove your external R and just use
>> the MacPorts version. Any reason not to do this ? In general MacPorts
>> (rightly) ignore
> On 11 May 2017, at 5:56 pm, Carlo Tambuatco wrote:
>
>
>> On May 11, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Jones
>> wrote:
>>
>> I would suggest the opposite instead. Remove your external R and just use
>> the MacPorts version. Any reason not to do this ? In general MacPorts
>> (rightly) ignore
> On May 11, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Jones
> wrote:
>
> I would suggest the opposite instead. Remove your external R and just use the
> MacPorts version. Any reason not to do this ? In general MacPorts (rightly)
> ignores anything outside its ${prefix}.
Well, the version of R under m
I would suggest the opposite instead. Remove your external R and just use the
MacPorts version. Any reason not to do this ? In general MacPorts (rightly)
ignores anything outside its ${prefix}.
Chris
> On 6 May 2017, at 3:54 am, Carlo Tambuatco wrote:
>
> I have the R.app application installe
Generally using MacPorts with anything in /usr/local will cause
problems, so see if R will install to another location.
You may be able to use binpaths in macports.conf in the way one can with
MacTeX, though this relies on ports having binary rather than port name
dependencies. Let me know if
