search for: some_packages

I am trying to upgrate rails from 3.0 to 3.1, while updating rails version I am getting following error rake aborted! undefined method `sanitize_limit'' for #<ActiveRecord::Relation:0x2aaaad35d720> /some_package/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-3.1.12/lib/active_record/relation.rb:460:in `method_missing''

...rprised when users cannot immediately install packages in the "usual R way (install.packages)". And this gets more complicated when we add a bunch of bioconductor packages, where BioConductor pages often say to install as source("https://bioconductor.org/biocLite.R") biocLite(some_packages) I've ended up doing .libPaths(c(the_user_home, .libPaths())) but this does not look very friendly for new users. Best, R. > > Dirk > > | > | > | -Kirill > | > | > Dirk > | > > | -- Ramon Diaz-Uriarte Department of Biochemistry, Lab B-25 F...

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com> wrote: > >> Tell your vendor you want a centos 6 version of the library, it's really >> not a huge ask, esp if you are paying them. If they say no, do a new >> install of centos 7 and run it on a different box. It's the only reasonable >> thing to do, and if you do anything else and

...n users cannot immediately install packages in the | "usual R way (install.packages)". And this gets more complicated when we | add a bunch of bioconductor packages, where BioConductor pages often say to | install as | | source("https://bioconductor.org/biocLite.R") | biocLite(some_packages) | | I've ended up doing | | .libPaths(c(the_user_home, .libPaths())) | | but this does not look very friendly for new users. Easier: Remove one # comment character in /etc/R/Renviron which does the same. As does setting in file /etc/R/Renviron.site (which the package never touches). And...

Hello, all. I have deleted some files for mistake. So I would like to re-install those files using yum install. But if I execute yum install some_package, that doesn't work, because some files are remain, I guess. So is there any yum install option to re-install forcely when some files are deleted? Should I remove all related files first to re-install using yum? Thanks in advance.

I did a "yum groupremove Java" and that failed "somehow". Yum listed all group members as "erased", but some rpm packages failed because of missing config files or so. As a result none of the 50 packages were removed from the rpm database, but all of their files seem to have been removed. How can I clean them out from the rpm db? Kai -- Kai Sch?tzl, Berlin,

...stall packages in the > | "usual R way (install.packages)". And this gets more complicated when we > | add a bunch of bioconductor packages, where BioConductor pages often say to > | install as > | > | source("https://bioconductor.org/biocLite.R") > | biocLite(some_packages) > | > | I've ended up doing > | > | .libPaths(c(the_user_home, .libPaths())) > | > | but this does not look very friendly for new users. > > Easier: Remove one # comment character in /etc/R/Renviron which does the same. > > As does setting in file /etc/R/Renviron....

When I first got involved with Red Hat (back with 5.2 in the early 90's) I learned the hard way not to use language-specific packaging systems like CPAN for Perl because they'd conflict with RPM's database and make it much harder to manage what was installed on my system. If I now need a package for which no RPM is available, I'll use a utility like cpanspec to repackage it

> On Mar 30, 2015, at 17:24, Patrick Flaherty <pflaherty at wsi.com> wrote: > > Tell your vendor you want a centos 6 version of the library, it's really > not a huge ask, esp if you are paying them. If they say no, do a new > install of centos 7 and run it on a different box. It's the only reasonable > thing to do, and if you do anything else and make anyone else

On 02.07.2017 22:01, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > On 2 July 2017 at 21:39, Kirill M?ller wrote: > | Hi > | > | An upgrade to R 3.4.1 on Ubuntu removed the default setting of > | R_LIBS_USER in /etc/R/Renviron. What's the rationale behind this? Thanks. > > Pretty much exactly what I told you in person last week :) > > - idea is to prefer /usr/local/lib/R/site-library/