Skip to content

FAQ: updating certain packages while a kernel is running is going to break the installation/fail #32

Open

Description

@jankatins

If update.packages touches a native package which is loaded, it will fail and leave the package in a weired state (at least if I use R CMD build in my local git).

This is not a problem unless that that package is jsonlite, which the kernel needs... In that case you need to shutdown all kernels and then reinstall jsonlite...

Activity

  1. takluyver commented on May 17, 2016

    @takluyver
    Member

    Is this a Windows issue with multiple processes trying to open the same file?

  2. jankatins commented on May 17, 2016

    @jankatins
    ContributorAuthor

    No, I think it is a problem with native code (= *.so on linux) trying to be replaced while in use.

  3. jankatins commented on May 17, 2016

    @jankatins
    ContributorAuthor

    Maybe it would be interesting to replace update.packages with a version which checks if one of the to-be-updated packages are in a "blacklist" and if so errors instead of crashing...?

  4. takluyver commented on May 17, 2016

    @takluyver
    Member

    I feel like we don't understand the problem well enough, and I'm wary of attempting to paper over bugs in R package installation - that's the kind of fix that can end up causing as much aggravation as the problem it aims to resolve.

  5. jankatins commented on May 17, 2016

    @jankatins
    ContributorAuthor

    true...

    BTW: I looked into the Rsession process of rstudio and they use rcp messages to communicate between the UI and the session... Not sure how easy it would be to translate the jupyter messages to rstudio messages and then use their rsession as the backend for the kernel... would remove a lot of headache from our usage of evaluate...

  6. flying-sheep commented on May 18, 2016

    @flying-sheep
    Member

    well, i guess that would be a separate project then.

    i think a hard dependency on RStudio is out of scope for this

  7. jankatins commented on May 18, 2016

    @jankatins
    ContributorAuthor

    Yep, the last would a replacement for our current evaluate based implementation...

  8. flying-sheep commented on May 20, 2016

    @flying-sheep
    Member

    i’ve added most FAQ entries, but it’s not clear if we should really add this

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions