-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Speed up installation #499
Comments
I thought that #105 related to cloning into the repository but wouldn't relate to installation of the package, but I could be wrong. |
yes this is related I think as I would imagine it was trying to clone the repo for a long time (which is the first step of github instal I think). Could be mistaken but will likely only be clear once #105 is resolved. |
given the changes in #105 could anyone having install problems please give it another go and report back. I saw no issues and no change between now and previously so would be good to get some insight. |
I just did a clean install (i.e. a fresh install of R) which took just under a minute. My expectation is that any remaining issues here are platform specific so as above feedback would be great. |
It's possible that @kgostic slow install time could have been installing dependencies (on the VAP). |
Something to note when looking into this is I found two 100mb full fits in the inst folder. This is ultimately what was causing the issue with R universe and may have been causing the issue with remotes installation (due to fire wall rules for large file sizes and connection stability). |
Circling back to this. My expectation is that install via remotes should now work. We can hold this open until binaries are being built on the Universe which should speed things up a few orders of magnitude (eta tomorrow). |
If you ping again here, I'll try to test this tomorrow. |
Installation via |
Closing this as assumed resolved |
The last time I tried to install the package, it took over an hour and never finished. Is it possible this is related to? #105?
@seabbs stated he had started working on this, but I'm not sure what's been done or how to close this out.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: