[Rd] R-1.2.3: a small suggestion (PR#961)
Fri, 1 Jun 2001 08:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Kurt Hornik wrote:
> I had asked about multiple version (and also platform) support several
> times during the past few years, and had always been told that this was
> not necessary. So why does this keep coming up?
> One can add a version layer, but one has to do this right. Patterning
> after the Emacs model is wrong. Binary incompatabilities were pointed
> out, so
> is not good enough. Emacs has added [the equivalent of]
> but that requires external control of version dependency at install
> time. We actually have the required info through the DESCRIPTION db,
> hence could take care of this.
Are you sure we have the right info? We know if a package is
source-incompatible with old versions of R but we may not know if it is
binary-incompatible with new versions. I was surprised to find that
survival seems to be binary-incompatible between 1.2.3 and 1.3.0 -- at
least, several bugs went away when I recompiled with pre1.3.0
Thomas Lumley Asst. Professor, Biostatistics
firstname.lastname@example.org University of Washington, Seattle
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: email@example.com