So tonight I used 123 to install 2.9.2 32 and 64 on a MacPro The 123 plan worked (including R.app's 5455) after simple testing
I think 123 might go on the <http://r.research.att.com/> page Or some other upfront page -- Loren Engrav, MD Professor and Chief, Plastic Surgery, 1977-2001 Associate Director, Burn Center, 1977-2001 Univ Washington Seattle > From: Simon Urbanek <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:55:04 -0400 > To: David Winsemius <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [R-SIG-Mac] [R] 64-bit OSX binary for 2.9.2 > > On Sep 14, 2009, at 7:28 PM, David Winsemius wrote: > >> >> On Sep 14, 2009, at 7:08 PM, David Winsemius wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sep 14, 2009, at 6:34 PM, Loren Engrav wrote: >>> >>> snipped >>>> >>>> 3-R.app available at http://r.research.att.com/ is 5426 but 5455 >>>> 32 and 64 >>>> bit available at >>>> http://r.research.att.com/R-GUI-5455-2.9-leopard-Leopard.dmg as >>>> per 8/6/09 >>>> r-sig-mac discussion so I put in 5455; but why 5426 here and 5455 >>>> there? >>> >>> Can't help you there. I have the 2.9.0 GUI [R.app GUI 1.29 (5463) >>> x86_64-apple-darwin9.7.0] running with the R 2.9.1 Patched and am >>> not having noticeable difficulties. My guess is that the "right" >>> way to do this would be to use 5426 with R 2.9.2 >> >> And my guess appears to be wrong. I installed the current R-2.9- >> branch-leopard-universal.tar.gz using Lianglou's confrmation of my >> suggestion that sudo might need to prefix the ta command. Also >> downloaded the Mac OS X GUI rev. 5426 for R 2.1.xleopard- >> Leopard64.dmg file and dragged the R.app file to another loaction, >> renamed it R64new,app, and dragged it to the Applications folder. >> That GUI crashes while the old one launches R just fine. My newly >> installed R says it is R version 2.9.1 Patched (2009-07-04 r48897) >> but I seem to remember Urbanek saying that is misleading and that it >> really is 2.9.2 > > No, I never said that :). I had posted the correct link here before: > http://r.research.att.com/R-GUI-5473-2.9-leopard-Leopard64.dmg > > Please DO note the 2.9 in the name! Clearly taking the R-devel version > of the GUI with R 2.9.2 is not supposed to work ... > > >>> >>> Note to web page maintainer. The labels on the R-GUI's must be >>> wrong, they say "R 2.1.x". Is that supposed to say R 2.9.x and >>> 2.10.x? > > 2.1.x is supposed to say 2.10.x (hence R-devel, really) - it's just a > glitch in the script that generates the names on build which assume > one-character versions. I was hoping that common sense would be > applied here since the builds are R-2.9-patched and R-devel it should > be obvious that one is 2.9.x and the other 2.10.x ... > > Cheers, > Simon > > PS: Sometime this week I hope to get some spare time to create the SL- > safe R 2.9.2 package installer to save the suffering early > adopters ;). The real blame should go to Apple for screwing up Java so > badly, though ... ;) > > _______________________________________________ > R-SIG-Mac mailing list > [email protected] > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mac _______________________________________________ R-SIG-Mac mailing list [email protected] https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mac
