From Kurt.Hornik@ci.tuwien.ac.at  Mon Jun 11 17:11:50 2001
From: Kurt.Hornik@ci.tuwien.ac.at (Kurt Hornik)
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:11:50 +0200
Subject: [Rd] Depends: R (>= x.y.z)
In-Reply-To: <3B24EC22.3BA15643@bank-banque-canada.ca>
References: <200106082025.WAA20114@pubhealth.ku.dk>
 <3B24EC22.3BA15643@bank-banque-canada.ca>
Message-ID: <15140.60870.780108.486399@mithrandir.hornik.net>

>>>>> Paul Gilbert writes:

> To my inverted way of thinking there is something wrong with the general
> logic of what is being attempted here.

> I think people should be encouraged to upgrade to the most recent
> released version of R. At best I test my packages with the last two
> releases of R, so it is only by accident that the "Depends" line on my
> packages may not specify the most recent release.

> On the other hand, an unmaintained package could quickly depend on an
> older version of R. I don't see any way a package maintainer can specify
> this, but there could be some mechanism (possible tied to passing R CMD
> check) that specifies dependency on an older version of R. Perhaps this
> might also be formally recognized as a mechanism for moving things out
> of the contrib section of CRAN.  If this is to be written into a file in
> the package it would require modifying the contents of the tar ball, but
> if it could be coded into a prefix on the package name it might be
> simpler?

You can do

	Depends: R (<= 1.2.3)

-k
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


[Rd] Depends: R (>= x.y.z)
Kurt Hornik