Re: [Rd] Dumb question time - R patched vs. R devel

From: Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz_at_medanalytics.com>
Date: Sat 09 Oct 2004 - 03:01:02 EST

On Fri, 2004-10-08 at 11:53, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2004, Marc Schwartz wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Perhaps my memory from 1.9.0 is gone and I need to be taking more
> > Ginko/Ginseng....
> >
> > The current R patched tarballs and diff file
> > (ftp://ftp.stat.math.ethz.ch/Software/R/R-release.diff.gz) appear to be
> > for 1.9.1 as opposed to 2.0.0 if my read of the files is correct.
>
> Correct.
>
> > The current devel tarballs are labelled with a version of 2.1.0. Makes
> > sense.
> >
> > If the R patched tarballs and diff file are for 1.9.1, are patches
> > actually being applied to 1.9.1 or are these files simply being
> > auto-made as the result of a daily script against the 1.9.1 subversion
> > repository?
>
> The latter. They should be ignored until Martin Maechler is able to create
> the correct ones.
>
> > Is there indeed any tarball/diff file for the 2.0.0 patched version?
>
> No.
>
> > I have been trying to avoid using subversion (given past discussions)
> > and downloading tarballs when I need to update my working version.
>
> The only way to get R-patched from the R-2-0-patches branch is by
> svn co https://svn.r-project/R/branches/R-2-0-patches. But be prepared to
> be patient, as it had not completed for me in 2 hours this morning.
> Also, as the date-stamp is not being updated, it will report the wrong
> date.
>
> I suggest ignoring R-patched for now. All the patches are in R-devel, and
> only a very small number of other things.

Prof. Ripley,

Thanks for the clarifications!

Best regards,

Marc



R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel Received on Sat Oct 09 03:12:50 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed 03 Nov 2004 - 22:45:20 EST