On 04/05/2007 9:32 PM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: > It certainly would be excellent if installing perl could be eliminated. > > One additional thing that I really dislike about the R installation is that > one needs "find" on one's path and that conflicts with "find" on Windows > so other applications unrelated to R that use scripts can suddenly break > because of R. If that could be solved at the same time it would be nice.
At a minimum we should be able to wrap the calls to find in a macro, so you could change the macro in MkRules and rename your copy from Rtools to remove the conflict. I'll take a look. Duncan Murdoch > > On 5/4/07, Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 04/05/2007 4:25 PM, Greg Snow wrote: >>> I have used the pp/par combination for Perl before. It is pretty straight >>> forward to convert an existing perl script into a stand alone windows >>> executable. >>> >>> Both the Activestate licence and the Perl Artistic licence allow for >>> embedding a script and perl interpreter together and distributing the >>> result. >>> >>> The current perl script(s) used for the R package build package could >>> easily be converted to a 'stand alone' windows executable and be >>> distributed with Rtools for those who do not want to install Perl >>> themselves. >>> >>> The only drawback is that even a "Hello World" script will result in over a >>> meg sized executable (due to the perl interpreter being included). >> I took a quick look at the PAR page on CPAN, and it seems possible to >> build a DLL that incorporates the interpreter, and then each individual >> script .exe could be much smaller. I'll see if I can get that to work; >> it would be really nice to be able to drop the Perl requirement. If we >> could do that, I'd include the command line tools plus the compiled >> scripts with the basic R distribution, so you could easily build simple >> packages. The Rtools.exe installer would then just need to install the >> MinGW compilers for packages containing compiled code, and a few extras >> needed for building R. >> >> I don't really know Perl, so I might be asking for advice if I get stuck. >> >> Duncan Murdoch >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Gabor Grothendieck >>> Sent: Fri 5/4/2007 11:55 AM >>> To: Doran, Harold >>> Cc: r-help@stat.math.ethz.ch; Duncan Murdoch >>> Subject: Re: [R] [SPAM] - Re: R package development in windows - >>> BayesianFilter detected spam >>> >>> >>> >>> Just googling I found this: >>> >>> http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=186402 >>> >>> On 5/4/07, Doran, Harold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> The best, of course, would be to get rid of Perl altogether. >>>> In Python, it is possible to make standalone executables. Is it possible >>>> to also do this in Perl, then one could eliminate a perl install. Or, is >>>> it possible to use Python to accomplish what perl is currently doing? I >>>> may be getting in over my head here since I really don't know what perl >>>> is doing under the hood. >>>> >>>> Harold >>>> >>> ______________________________________________ >>> R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help >>> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html >>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >>> >>> >>> >> ______________________________________________ R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
