On 2011-09-29, Amit Kulkarni <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > can somebody who knows R give some feedback whether the port I have > updated to is ok, needs further tweaks, or is just plain wrong?
I don't know R though here are a few comments from reading diff... > -SHARED_LIBS= Rlapack 29.0 \ > - Rblas 29.0 > +DISTNAME= R-2.13.1 > +REVISION= 0 .. > + > +SHARED_LIBS+= Rblas 213.1 > +SHARED_LIBS+= Rlapack 213.1 these library versions are wrong, they should either be 29.0, 29.1 or 30.0 depending on what changes were made to the ABI if any. > -- char c, ccc, method, flags, dummy[6]; > -+ signed char c; > -+ char ccc, method, flags, dummy[6]; > -- int i, res, clen = 1; char s[9]; > -+ int i, res, clen = 1; signed char s[9]; didn't look at the code, but check you haven't lost useful patches here - some arch (specifically ppc and arm) default to unsigned chars. > - SOURCES_C = Lapack.c @USE_VECLIB_G95FIX_TRUE@ vecLibg95c.c I wonder how many copies of lapack are in the tree ;) PLIST | 8428 +++--------------------------------------------------------------- 1 file changed, 427 insertions(+), 8001 deletions(-) that's an awful lot of lines removed, is this expected/correct?
