From htl10 at users.sourceforge.net  Fri Feb 15 19:55:28 2013
From: htl10 at users.sourceforge.net (Hin-Tak Leung)
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:55:28 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Rd] Matrix does not build with R trunk since Oct.
In-Reply-To: <7AA3622A-9144-40A6-9A9B-A499A3ACFBB2@r-project.org>
Message-ID: <1360954528.30906.YahooMailClassic@web172303.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

Look. I don't see this as "my" problem - as far as I am concerned, I have donated my time - and over and over - to testing pre-released code. I am not using pre-released code for production work. If the released code in 3.0 does not work correctly in 6 weeks' time, I just don't upgrade. No loss for me there.

I don't know why it is degenerating into another distraction about some people's egos.

--- On Fri, 15/2/13, Simon Urbanek <simon.urbanek at r-project.org> wrote:

> On Feb 15, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Hin-Tak
> Leung wrote:
> 
> > --- On Fri, 15/2/13, Simon Urbanek <simon.urbanek at r-project.org>
> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Feb 15, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Hin-Tak
> >> Leung wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Somebody else had written separately about this
> before,
> >> and so have I a couple of months ago. I assumed
> this will be
> >> fixed before the next R. Since R 3.0 is supposedly
> only 6
> >> weeks away, even if it is fixed now it doesn't
> leave much
> >> room for testing. 
> >>> 
> >>> Anyway neither Matrix 1.0-11 (current) nor
> 1.0-9 (sept
> >> 2012) build with current R trunk.? The?
> last time
> >> it did was 1. 0-9 on 3rd october over 4 months ago.
> So it
> >> appears to be due to change inside r trunk in sept
> or early
> >> oct. 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> No problem here - Matrix 1.0-11 and R-devel build
> just fine
> >> with your flags (tested on Ubuntu 12.10, x86_64).
> >> 
> >> If in doubt, please remove R-devel and checkout a
> fresh
> >> copy. Also FWIW it's a bad practice to build inside
> the
> >> sources - it often causes all sorts of problems
> when you try
> >> to track the sources and stale files are probably
> what's
> >> hitting you.
> >> 
> >> FWIW: This is likely not the problem you're
> mentioning, but
> >> some recent gcc versions break and LTO is also
> known to
> >> cause issues depending on the compiler version, so
> tread
> >> lightly on the cutting edge.
> > 
> > 
> > Here is a fairly similar post:
> > http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Build-from-Source-fails-on-Loading-required-package-Matrix-td4640371.html
> > 
> > The eventual "solution" of that thread seems to be
> building from tar ball, which is quite beside the whole
> point of building from svn trunk.
> > 
> 
> And how is that relevant to what I said? Did you follow the
> advice I sent? If you did and still have an issue, post
> *exact* details on what you did, what system and tools you
> are using. 
> 
> 
> > FWIW, it is very unproductive to talk about "bad
> practice" - in a hand-waving undocumented/unsubstantiated
> manner
> 
> Building in sources has two problems: a) the content of the
> source tree can change so subsequent builds can be different
> from the clean one - you cannot undo that and b) if you
> update the sources stale files from previous builds can
> break the build. 
> 
> If solving your problems is "unproductive" then I'm not
> surprised you have them for 4 moths now.
> 
> 
> > - and options that might or might not work. If
> "--enable-lto" (or any other options, or build within the
> dev directory) does not work reliably, it should be either
> disabled/removed, or documented, or both.
> 
> R cannot test all aspects of a compiler and detect all its
> bugs. It is *your* responsibility to provide a working
> compiler - if you are unwilling to do that, R cannot do
> anything about that.
> 
> 
> > Anyway, it has not been working for over 4 months.
> > 
> 
> That is not true, obviously, and I have presented a
> counter-example. It may not have been working for *you* and
> it's likely a problem in your setup (given your lack of
> cooperation there is no way to tell for sure). We cannot
> prevent user errors. We can try to point people in the right
> direction, but if they refuse to listen it's on their head.
> 
> 
> > You have about 6 weeks before this becomes a big
> problem - "big" as in "wide-spread".
> > 
> 
> You are yet to show that this is a problem in R at all. You
> failed to follow the basic instructions in the FAQ.
> 
> Cheers,
> Simon
> 
> 
> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> Simon
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>> ----------------
> >>> Loading required package: Matrix
> >>> Error in namespaceExport(ns, exports) :
> undefined
> >> exports: .M.classEnv
> >>> Error : require(Matrix) is not TRUE
> >>> ERROR: installing package indices failed
> >>> * removing ?/svn-loc/R/library/Matrix?
> >>> * restoring previous
> ?/svn-loc/R/library/Matrix?
> >>> make[2]: *** [Matrix.ts] Error 1
> >>> make[2]: Leaving directory
> >> `/svn-loc/R/src/library/Recommended'
> >>> make[1]: *** [recommended-packages] Error 2
> >>> make[1]: Leaving directory
> >> `/svn-loc/R/src/library/Recommended'
> >>> make: *** [stamp-recommended] Error 2
> >>> ----------------
> >>> 
> >>> If it matters, here is what r trunk built
> with:
> >>> ./configure --enable-memory-profiling
> >> --enable-strict-barrier
> --enable-byte-compiled-packages
> >> --with-valgrind-instrumentation=2 --enable-lto
> >>> 
> >>> ______________________________________________
> >>> R-devel at r-project.org
> >> mailing list
> >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> 
>



[Rd] Matrix does not build with R trunk since Oct.
Hin-Tak Leung