[Rd] Cross-compile errors under R-2.4.0 and R-2.4.1

Hin-Tak Leung hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk
Sat Jan 20 00:46:28 CET 2007

Simon Urbanek wrote:
> In fact, there is even one more caveat which I don't remember seeing 
> mentioned - it *must* be a build without r_arch set, otherwise the 
> cross-build fails as well (despite a correct version). I got bitten by 
> this recently when trying to use the OS X binary for cross-building..

I developed my own multi-arch set up during 2.3.x before the official
implementation - I have a "massaged" rpm spec file which, depends on
whether one does 'rpmbuild --target=i686 R.spec' or just 'rpmbuild 
R.spec' (='rpmbuild --target=x86_64 R.spec'), prepend -m32 to 
CFLAGS/FFLAGS/LDFLAGS, switch %_lib between lib or lib64, and also
rename /usr/bin/R to /usr/bin/R64 . So my 32-bit R and 64-bit R are 
essentially separate: /usr/bin/R + /usr/lib/R for 32-bit, /usr/bin/R64
+ /usr/lib64/R for 64-bit, and they only share the docs directories
such as /usr/share/info and /usr/share/doc/R-* . I read that the new 
r_arch based set-up is more space efficient, but I haven't switch
over yet (and not in any great urgency, since my current bi-arch
set up does what I want).

> And while we are at cross-building, it is possible to generate chm 
> manuals via hhc through wine, but you have to use original itss.dll 
> instead of the one supplied by wine. The hhw path in MkRules must then 
> point to the local directory on the host (because it's used for the 
> headers files) and you'll have to create shell-wrapper for hhc that 
> looks somewhat like "wine hhc.exe $*".

Thanks for that tip - I'll be sure to try it out the next time I 
cross-build. Are you using wine under OS X intel or did we switch
platform in two paragraphs? Just for curiosity.


More information about the R-devel mailing list