On 2 September 2017 at 19:23, Steve Cotton wrote:
| If I may ask, "why do you want to spend the developer time to rebuild only 46
| packages, when there's already an infrastructure that does it for you, at the
| cost of rebuilding all 516"?
Because in my 20+ years with Debian, we generally opted for the technically
correct solution rather than what one may call the nuclear option.
I still happen to believe in proper engineering, which is why I went through
the trouble of finely documenting what is needed here:
http://eddelbuettel.github.io/rcppapt/binnmuAfterR340.html
The change in R is still not an abi change but simple a (in hindsight) less
than perfect implementation requiring a small subset (less than 10%) of
packages to be rebuilt.
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
