For off-piste use I would have consulted `setRepositories(graphics = FALSE)`
and then
```
## use Sys.setenv() before setRepositories
Sys.setenv(R_BIOC_VERSION="3.18")
setRepositories(ind = 1:4) # CRAN plus Bioc soft, anno, and expt repos
getOption("repos") # check
install.packages("BiocGenerics")
```
The help page ?BIOCONDUCTOR_ONLINE_VERSION_DIAGNOSIS says
�BIOCONDUCTOR_ONLINE_VERSION_DIAGNOSIS� is an environment variable
or global �options()� which, when set to �FALSE�, avoids the R and
_Bioconductor_ version checks that are done by querying an online
configuration file. Setting
�BIOCONDUCTOR_ONLINE_VERSION_DIAGNOSIS� to �FALSE� can speed
package loading when internet access is slow or non-existent, but
may result in out-of-date information about the current release
and development versions of _Bioconductor_. Offline users should
set the �BIOCONDUCTOR_CONFIG_FILE� environment variable or option
to a �.yaml� file similar to
https://bioconductor.org/config.yaml for full offline use and
version validation.
This could be clarified to more clearly indicate that
BIOCONDUCTOR_ONLINE_VERSION_DIAGNOSIS replaces the online version check with a
local check against BIOCONDUCTOR_CONFIG_FILE; it does not disable the check. If
you've copied the online file to a local file verbatim, then the same
constraints are validated but without going online.
The use case that this is meant to support is when the Bioconductor repository
(options(BioC_mirror = �)) is itself off-line or not internet accessible, as
might be the case in a corporate or HPC environment where a local mirror is
maintained on the file system or inside a firewall.
One could hack the local config file in a more or less obvious way (replace
"3.18" : "4.3" in the r_ver_for_bioc_ver section) but I would do something less
easily forgotten.
FWIW I don't think BiocManager should support non-standard installations,
keeping most users on track but letting the experts fend for themselves.
Martin
From: Bioc-devel <bioc-devel-boun...@r-project.org> on behalf of Wolfgang Huber
<wolfgang.hu...@embl.org>
Date: Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 4:40 AM
To: bioc-devel@r-project.org <bioc-devel@r-project.org>
Subject: [Bioc-devel] BiocManager::install
Hi,
I am wondering whether:
1. it could be easier to install Bioconductor packages (devel or release) on
R-devel (or other non-standard R versions) using BiocManager::install (I may be
stirring a hornet�s nest with that:)
2. whether its documentation needs to be updated and/or its implementation
could be deconvoluted (hopefully that�s uncontroversial).
Re the first point, I appreciate that we�re trying to help non-expert users
with simple use cases, and that we had/have a lot of trouble with users working
with out-of-sync versions. OTOH, the current solution (rigid, confusing
documentation, seemingly buggy implementation) seems to be standing in the way
for developers, a dichotomy that we do not really want.
Of course, a workaround is
```{r}
> install.packages("ggtree", repos = c(�@CRAN@",
> "https://bioconductor.org/packages/3.18/bioc";)
```
and maybe this is just the answer. So far, my workflows have been based on
BiocManager::install, but I get (and cannot seem to get rid of):
```{r}
> options(BIOCONDUCTOR_ONLINE_VERSION_DIAGNOSIS = FALSE)
> BiocManager::install("ggtree", version = "devel")
Error: Bioconductor does not yet build and check packages for R version 4.4; see
https://bioconductor.org/install
> sessionInfo()
R Under development (unstable) (2023-05-05 r84398)
Platform: aarch64-apple-darwin20 (64-bit)
Running under: macOS Ventura 13.3.1
Matrix products: default
BLAS:
/System/Library/Frameworks/Accelerate.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/vecLib.framework/Versions/A/libBLAS.dylib
LAPACK: /Users/whuber/R.framework/Versions/4.4/Resources/lib/libRlapack.dylib;
LAPACK version 3.11.0
locale:
[1] en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8/C/en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8
time zone: Europe/Berlin
tzcode source: internal
attached base packages:
[1] stats graphics grDevices utils datasets methods base
other attached packages:
[1] BiocManager_1.30.20 fortunes_1.5-4
loaded via a namespace (and not attached):
[1] compiler_4.4.0 tools_4.4.0 rstudioapi_0.14
```
I noted some discussion on this here:
https://github.com/Bioconductor/BiocManager/issues/13 but this was 5 years ago.
It appears that the documentation of BiocManager::install mismatches its
implementation, and overall the process for something that's conceptually quite
simple seems to have become convoluted.
One of the most helpful documentation resources on this topic btw is
https://solutions.posit.co/envs-pkgs/bioconductor/ which cheerfully concludes
"Working with BioConductor packages for code development is possible."
Thanks and best wishes
Wolfgang
--
Wolfgang Huber
EMBL
https://www.embl.org/groups/huber
_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
