On 2/22/11 4:33 PM, "Simon Urbanek" <simon.urba...@r-project.org> wrote:
> >On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:29 PM, <ken.willi...@thomsonreuters.com> ><ken.willi...@thomsonreuters.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> On 2/22/11 4:25 PM, "Simon Urbanek" <simon.urba...@r-project.org> wrote: >> >>> On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:12 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Anyway---I will point our OS X user to source installs. >>>> >>> >>> Well, I don't think that helps in any way - the test will still fail >>>for >>> all 10.5 users. Why don't you just fix the test? It's up to you, but >>> removing Rcpp from CRAN won't help anyone (well, almost ;)). >> >> >> Actually it helps a great deal, it means that 10.6 users can install >> something. >> > >Can you explain? You can always install from sources (provided you have >all the tools etc.) - regardless whether there is a binary or not... That's true - but for most OS X users, myself included until just a couple hours ago, it looks like (when using the R.app GUI install tools) the oldest successfully-built binary is the "latest available version", unless someone like Dirk points us to the source install and says it should work fine. So it certainly helped me because I didn't know what I was missing. > >>What's this about removing Rcpp from CRAN though? Just a joke I assume? >> > >No, why? Because it's a useful package, of course. And CRAN is where someone should go to find useful R packages. -- Ken Williams Senior Research Scientist Thomson Reuters http://labs.thomsonreuters.com _______________________________________________ Rcpp-devel mailing list Rcpp-devel@lists.r-forge.r-project.org https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
