On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 9:15:23 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > > Le samedi 20 août 2016 19:46:45 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : >> >> >> >> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 7:44:15 PM UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 7:05:27 PM UTC+2, leif wrote: >>>> >>>> Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >>>> > While trying my hand <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20523> at >>>> porting >>>> > R 3.3.1 to Sage (needs_review, by the way), I found this in the >>>> > current R Installation and Administration manual >>>> > <https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-admin.html#Cygwin> >>>> : >>>> > >>>> >> C.8 Cygwin >>>> >> >>>> >> The 32-bit version has never worked well enough to pass R’s make >>>> > check, and residual support from >>>> >> earlier experiments was removed in R 3.3.0. >>>> >>> I wonder what the residual support was... >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> The 64-bit version is completely unsupported. >>>> >>> I concur, but that was for bad reasons, or let's be fair, one could say >>> the lack of manpower maybe? >>> >>>> > >>>> > Maybe we should consider to have an interface to system's R rather >>>> than >>>> > our own version (and therefore make it an optional package) >>>> >>>> +1 for making it an optional package. (It's by the way not what I'd >>>> call a small package, and also takes some time to build.) >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> The Cygwin developers certainly have to say something regarding support >>>> as a standard package. (I don't think it would make sense to upgrade >>>> Sage's R version *and* keep it a standard package if it does no longer >>>> build on Cygwin. We could presumably still keep Rpy and let it use the >>>> system version of R, also on Windoze, if present and suited.) g >>>> >>>> It's not my impression that The R folk really supported any version of >>> Cygwin recently. >>> I even got bashed out when proposing a simple and non-intrusive patch >>> for Cygwin64. >>> The point is that it seems hopeless to push patches upstream which is a >>> very bad point. >>> gwthat hard at all, one just needs a setup and a very little bit of good >>> will: >>> ftp://cygwin.com/pub/cygwin/x86_64/release/R/ >>> So yes R still builds on Cygwin32/64. >>> >> And frankly the set of patches shipped by Cygwin is really small... >> > > Did you try to use the cygwin tarball as a source for Sage's R version ? > > BTW : could it be acceptable to have multiple tarballs as a source for R > on different platforms ? Or different set of patches ? > > That would be complicated.
> Another alternative : can the spkg-install script use only certain patches > (as a function of the platform he's running on) ? In that case, a diff > between the original tarball and the Cygwin-patced tarball could be applied > if and only if one is installing on cygwin. > > Very easy, I can try to do it. But the main point is that the Cygwyn's folk R patches only modify the build system behavior when run on Cygwin. If you apply the patches and build on Linux it would make no differences. > What do you think ? I do not understand the Sage build system well enough > to understand if this is possible, much less how... I need your advice... > > >> One would need to make a diplomatic move toward R folk. >> > > I doubt it : the set of Sage's R users is probably fairly small compared > to the number of R users... > > -- > Emmanuel Charpentier > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
