Re: [Rd] (PR#14226) -- Re: libgfortran misplaced in Mac OS X R install

2010-03-08 Thread Michael Spiegel
Thank you both for the advice. It sounds like we have a solution for our next binary release of the beta package. --Michael On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: > Another possibility is to link statically to libgfortran.  That has pros and > cons, but for libgfortran not man

Re: [Rd] (PR#14226) -- Re: libgfortran misplaced in Mac OS X R install

2010-03-04 Thread Prof Brian Ripley
Another possibility is to link statically to libgfortran. That has pros and cons, but for libgfortran not many cons apart from space for multiple copies in sundry packages (and is what is done on Windows, BTW). There are several ways to arrange that. As far as I recall I temporarily removed

Re: [Rd] (PR#14226) -- Re: libgfortran misplaced in Mac OS X R install (PR#14226)

2010-03-04 Thread Simon Urbanek
Hi Michael, On Mar 3, 2010, at 12:01 , Michael Spiegel wrote: I am the guy who compiles the OpenMx binaries. We would be delighted to place our package on CRAN, once the project is stable enough so that we are comfortable releasing it to the larger public. Let's try to track down where I

[Rd] (PR#14226) -- Re: libgfortran misplaced in Mac OS X R install (PR#14226)

2010-03-04 Thread Michael Spiegel
I am the guy who compiles the OpenMx binaries. We would be delighted to place our package on CRAN, once the project is stable enough so that we are comfortable releasing it to the larger public. Let's try to track down where I made a mistake. Our Makevars.in file contains the line: PKG_LIBS=$(F