From ben.bob at gmail.com  Mon Jan 16 15:35:15 2006
From: ben.bob at gmail.com (Bo Peng)
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:35:15 -0600
Subject: [Rd] Provide both shlib and standard versions of R?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0601160725460.2921@gannet.stats>
References: <6ea7b5430601152021y2a54089bj9f8b122b91d007b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<5AC56224-204C-4FFF-881A-994A5C01A11C@r-project.org>
	<6ea7b5430601152203o5d1ff963vdb0323d21c1b4ff2@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0601160108290.19320@illuminati.stderr.org>
	<6ea7b5430601152245w3629a110w586b62f17f35e116@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0601160725460.2921@gannet.stats>
Message-ID: <6ea7b5430601160635qcf1f980qea3384576a04f077@mail.gmail.com>

> Why guess?  There are accurate statements in the R-admin manual,

I read the manual 2 years ago, and the info I got was still correct.

> and the RH RPM change was discussed on this list in 2006:
> https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2006-January/036118.html

I simply do not know RPMs have been built with this option on, and
there is no definite place/word I can be assured about this.

> No, for the reasons given in the R-admin manual.

Even the reason I gave in my first email was not up to date (most
binary distributions are compiled with this option), my suggest is
still valid: why not provide two binaries? Most users can use standard
R without sacrificing performance  and embedding applications use
libR.so and, if needed, a separate binary R_embed.

Cheers,
Bo



[Rd] Provide both shlib and standard versions of R?
Bo Peng