Re: R-alpha: R and Linux RedHat-4.1

Kurt Hornik (
Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:57:08 +0100

Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:57:08 +0100
Message-Id: <>
From: Kurt Hornik <>
To: Douglas Bates <>
Subject: Re: R-alpha: R and  Linux RedHat-4.1
In-Reply-To: <>

>>>>> Douglas Bates writes:

>>>>> "Martyn" == Martyn Plummer <> writes:

Martyn> Looking at Kurt's FAQ I see that a big jump in the version
Martyn> number (to 0.50) is coming.  Perhaps this would be a good
Martyn> time to start distributing binary packages for R.

Martyn> It is surprisingly easy to create an RPM package for RedHat
Martyn> Linux.  If nobody has done this already I volunteer to
Martyn> create one and keep it up to date, starting with 0.50.

Martyn> My only problem is that I don't have a DNS registered ftp
Martyn> server, though I'm planning to change this in the next
Martyn> couple of months. Would it be OK to upload a binary
Martyn> distribution into pub/incoming on the Auckland ftp server?

Looks like my FAQ does accelerate things ...

Ross & I decided last week that I'd take a shot at starting a
comprehensive R archive, project codename CRAN (Comprehensive R Archive
Network), here at our site.  Ideally, e.g, Martin's site, U of Wash and
Statlib could mirror that (so that the `N' really makes sense), but that
has not been discussed yet.

So, as soon as 0.50 is out officially, people can upload packages and R
binary distributions at our site.  I will also try to get the process of
porting packages from S more coordinated.

This is not the official announcement yet, hence no specific directions.

> There has been some brief discussion of creating an RPM package or a
> .deb package for Debian Linux before and I think it is a very good
> idea.  One thing about the Debian packages is that they are signed
> with a PGP signature.  I'm just tossing out the idea that it may be a
> good idea to determine a way in which "official" R binary
> distributions or add-on libraries could have digital signatures on
> them.  The Internet is getting to be a big place and not everyone out
> there is wearing a white hat.  We could show how forward-looking the
> R-testers community is by providing a means to verify that the package
> or add-on you install is the same as the one that was originally
> created and that it came from the person who claims to have made it.

Hmm ... I like that idea although we haven't put PGP signatures on any
of our Debian packages yet.  Are you thinking of providing one package
per R package?

We might also need to standardize things a bit (installation dirs, ...)

r-testers mailing list -- Read
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: