From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 00:09:35 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:09:35 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] R 2.3.0 about to hit Fedora Extras Message-ID: <1145923775.22894.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> Since Jos? and me are the only R maintainers, this only really affects us, but there is always the possibility that other people care: R 2.3.0 is about to hit Fedora Extras. I like to keep it current. The R folks like us to keep it current. :) Please test any addons against it, and report failures either in bugzilla or on fedora-r-devel-list. Thanks, ~spot -- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my! From jamatos at fc.up.pt Wed Apr 26 11:18:30 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 12:18:30 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] Re: rpy needs to be rebuilt in time for next push In-Reply-To: References: <1145923775.22894.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <200604261218.30503.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Wednesday 26 April 2006 01:35, Alex Lancaster wrote: > > Well, it's broken again! Grr. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189946 > > Would it be possible to hold back the upgrade of the R release until > you have heard from maintainers of dependent packages like (Jos?) that > they know to rebuild their packages, or rebuild it for them? > > Either way would prevent "yum upgrade" breaking, which it is right > now. Yesterday was public holiday here... The fix is not as straight forward as I would like: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/8338-rpy-0.4.6-8.fc6/ I will investigate further... > Alex PS: I have subscribed to fedora-r-devel-list now. PPS: It would be interesting to announce this mailing list in some of the other lists. Just an idea. -- Jos? Ab?lio From jamatos at fc.up.pt Wed Apr 26 15:06:24 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:06:24 +0100 Subject: [Fedora-r-devel-list] Re: rpy needs to be rebuilt in time for next push In-Reply-To: <200604261218.30503.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <1145923775.22894.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200604261218.30503.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <200604261606.24722.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Wednesday 26 April 2006 12:18, Jose' Matos wrote: > ? The fix is not as straight forward as I would like: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/8338-rpy-0 >.4.6-8.fc6/ > > ? I will investigate further... Fixed. The fix was easy. :-) As I suspected the cause is displayed in the release notes of R: o The version string shown in the startup message and by "R --version", and that stored in variable R.version.string are now in exactly the same format. $ R --version R version 2.3.0 (2006-04-24) ... previously "version" was not there (first line). I had also to fight with the (inter)dependence between texinfo and tetex. BuildRequires texinfo implies tetex for FC-4 and FC-5 but not for FC-3 and FC-6. :-) All versions have been built now and they should be available in the next iteration of Extras. -- Jos? Ab?lio