R help - Apr 2010 - Upgrading R using the "global library folder" strategy - what do you think about it?

Hello dear R-help mailing list,

The other day I published a blog post (with some R code) to help R-users who
want to implement a simpler upgrading strategy for R (under windows - but
probably the same will be true of mac OS, I am not sure about Linux).

This e-mail has 3 goals: (a) To share, (b) to get feedback, and (c) to
propose to implement this strategy to R's core.
*
*
*a) Share*
The idea of this upgrading strategy is to save steps in upgrading.  When one
wishes to upgrade R, instead of doing the following three steps:
1) download new R and install
2) copy the "library" content from the old R to the new R
3) upgrade all of the packages (in the library folder) to the new version of
R.
You could instead just have steps 1 and 3, and skip step 2.
How?
By using a "global" library which will reside outside (and besides) of
the
normal R installation folder.
Here is the link to the post where I explain how to do this with R running
under windows (and also supplied some R code to help with this move):
http://www.r-statistics.com/2010/04/changing-your-r-upgrading-strategy-and-the-r-code-to-do-it-on-windows/
(Credit: this strategy was proposed by Dirk
Eddelbuettel<http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com/blog/>,
to whom I give my thanks)

*b) Feedback*
I would love to know if someone here can suggest when this strategy might
not be the best one.
I also welcome any suggestions for improving the code I wrote for helping
users make the transition to this upgrading system.

*c) R core implementation ?!*
I hope I am not being rude (or jumping into any open doors) in asking this
but...
What do you think about implementing this strategy into the R basic
installation?



With honest respect and care,
Tal

----------------Contact
Details:-------------------------------------------------------
Contact me: Tal.Galili@gmail.com |  972-52-7275845
Read me: www.talgalili.com (Hebrew) | www.biostatistics.co.il (Hebrew) |
www.r-statistics.com (English)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: r-help-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-help-bounces at
r-project.org]
> On Behalf Of Tal Galili
> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 9:40 AM
> To: r-help at r-project.org
> Subject: [R] Upgrading R using the "global library folder"
strategy - what
> do you think about it?
> 
> Hello dear R-help mailing list,
> 
> The other day I published a blog post (with some R code) to help R-users
> who
> want to implement a simpler upgrading strategy for R (under windows - but
> probably the same will be true of mac OS, I am not sure about Linux).
> 
> This e-mail has 3 goals: (a) To share, (b) to get feedback, and (c) to
> propose to implement this strategy to R's core.
> *
> *
> *a) Share*
> The idea of this upgrading strategy is to save steps in upgrading.  When
> one
> wishes to upgrade R, instead of doing the following three steps:
> 1) download new R and install
> 2) copy the "library" content from the old R to the new R
> 3) upgrade all of the packages (in the library folder) to the new version
> of
> R.
> You could instead just have steps 1 and 3, and skip step 2.
> How?
> By using a "global" library which will reside outside (and
besides) of the
> normal R installation folder.
> Here is the link to the post where I explain how to do this with R running
> under windows (and also supplied some R code to help with this move):
> http://www.r-statistics.com/2010/04/changing-your-r-upgrading-strategy-
> and-the-r-code-to-do-it-on-windows/
> (Credit: this strategy was proposed by Dirk
> Eddelbuettel<http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com/blog/>,
> to whom I give my thanks)
> 
> *b) Feedback*
> I would love to know if someone here can suggest when this strategy might
> not be the best one.
> I also welcome any suggestions for improving the code I wrote for helping
> users make the transition to this upgrading system.
> 
> *c) R core implementation ?!*
> I hope I am not being rude (or jumping into any open doors) in asking this
> but...
> What do you think about implementing this strategy into the R basic
> installation?
> 
> 
> 
> With honest respect and care,
> Tal

Tal,

I looked at your blog, and your instructions, and I guess that for Windows
(which I use) I don't see the advantage over using the R_LIBS environment
variable as discussed in the R-FAQ for Windows.  You need to initially copy
current user installed librarys to your R_LIBS directory (similar to your
instructions), but once that is done, all you need to do to upgrade is install a
new version of R and then run update.packages() from the new R installation. 
And for the latest versions of R and Windows, it seems something like that is
done by default if you don't have R_LIBS or R_LIBS_USER defined.

Dan

Daniel Nordlund
Bothell, WA USA

I think it makes more sense for most users to have a global library
(as you call it), rather than put the library under the current
installation.  I have been doing that for years, and it saves a lot of
trouble.

When I have helped people learn R, the need to copy the library when
updating is a regular source of confusion and questions. Many users
are not particularly computer-savvy.

Given that, it would seem desirable for the R installation to default
to a global library location.