| 1 |
On Friday 19 March, Auke Booij wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Please forgive me for my lack of knowledge about package managers, but |
| 4 |
> what systems are in place to generate ebuilds on the fly? And is there |
| 5 |
> any compatibility between the different package managers in that |
| 6 |
> sense? Would it be possible to make an overlay build a repository of R |
| 7 |
> packages on the fly? If ebuilds are generated on the fly, how will we |
| 8 |
> deal with nontrivial ebuilds? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> As always, there are a number of advantages to make the package |
| 11 |
> manager do the hard work. I guess some more benefits would, among |
| 12 |
> many, be: emerge world updates R packages too (ie. centralized |
| 13 |
> updating), packages in portage can pull in R packages without user |
| 14 |
> interference, and users can relatively easily install R packages with |
| 15 |
> patches. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Experiment with g-cpan and g-ctan in the portage tree to have an idea |
| 18 |
of what is done. Indeed working directly with the package manager is |
| 19 |
more appealing for many reasons: dependencies, QA, convenience, ...For |
| 20 |
differences between package managers, see with the different parties |
| 21 |
involved. To my knowledge only paludis had some CRAN integration at |
| 22 |
some point. Also Debian has a cran2deb utility which is probably |
| 23 |
worth looking into, they actually had a GSoC 2008 project about it. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Sebastien |
Archives