[R] RPM of R-1.2.1 for RH 7?

[Peter Dalgaard BSA]

apjaworski at mmm.com writes:

>  As Prof. Ripley remarked, the gcc-2.96 compiler suite is not an official
> release.   The 2.95.2 is recommended for production work.  The 2.96 version
> is reported to have problems with C++ code but I could not verify that
> these problems were fixed in the upgrade.  Again, I know that I can
> compile, for example, the whole QT-2.2.2 tutorial without a single warning,
> but this of course does not prove anything.

Yup. Even though Brian (and many otheres with him) is right that
RedHat pulled a terrible stunt with this compiler-"release", they seem
to have landed the thing on its feet, not least due to very bright
people like Jakub Jelinek who have been handling the reports of
compiler bugs we triggered entirely sensibly.

(I still remember the bug in the "cb" C beautifier program which could
turn 1e-6 into 1e - 6 which the complier parsed as 1 - 6 = -5.  I
reported that one to HP only to find it again years later in Solaris
based on the same codebase...)

-- 
   O__  ---- Peter Dalgaard             Blegdamsvej 3  
  c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics     2200 Cph. N   
 (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen   Denmark      Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk)             FAX: (+45) 35327907
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help 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: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._