On 13 April 2013 at 10:41, Don Armstrong wrote: | On Tue, 09 Apr 2013, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > It really isn't needed as debian-r.debian.net / cran2deb is a huge | > big fat binNMU generator (and more, package creator). | | debian-r.debian.net actually uses a modified cran2deb to create source | packages, which get built in the normal debian pathway (dak, | wannabuild, and sbuild), so it's not quite so easy just to rebuild | everything. [But it is fairly trivial given a list of packages and | wanna-build.]
Ah. There is fork aspect of your rebuild. | However, because I didn't notice that cran2deb doesn't use the | substitution variable, and also doesn't handle new debian revisions Yes, probably predates it. | properly, it's even more complicated. I'd kind of like to be able to | have a working r-api provides and R:Depends when I finally get around | to coding up everything properly. | | > That is a discussion we should have about the possible "moonshoot" | > of having the 4400+ CRAN package (or a "reasonable" [ for different | > definitions of "reasonable" ]) subset in Debian. | | Right. I'd certainly like to see more r-cran- packages in Debian | proper. [Probably with some sort of cohesive project like the perl | packaging group.] But I think this isn't really on topic for this bug; | we probably should bang this all out on some other mailing list or | meeting. We probably should think about a meeting. For you and me to get together should be easy (and cheap-ish). Michael (in PA) may be game too. Question what we'll about interested parties not residing in North America (eg Charles). Thanks also for merging the bug reports. Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | [email protected] | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
