From murdoch at stats.uwo.ca  Fri Oct  8 19:17:21 2004
From: murdoch at stats.uwo.ca (Duncan Murdoch)
Date: Fri Oct  8 19:17:21 2004
Subject: [Rd] Dumb question time - R patched vs. R devel
In-Reply-To: <1097252958.17307.72.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1097252958.17307.72.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <rnidm0t1o7g1vkterskmsjea3mg1h1ag20@4ax.com>

On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 11:29:18 -0500, Marc Schwartz
<MSchwartz@MedAnalytics.com> wrote :

>Hi all,
>
>Perhaps my memory from 1.9.0 is gone and I need to be taking more
>Ginko/Ginseng....
>
>The current R patched tarballs and diff file
>(ftp://ftp.stat.math.ethz.ch/Software/R/R-release.diff.gz) appear to be
>for 1.9.1 as opposed to 2.0.0 if my read of the files is correct.
>
>The current devel tarballs are labelled with a version of 2.1.0. Makes
>sense.
>
>If the R patched tarballs and diff file are for 1.9.1, are patches
>actually being applied to 1.9.1 or are these files simply being
>auto-made as the result of a daily script against the 1.9.1 subversion
>repository?
>
>Is there indeed any tarball/diff file for the 2.0.0 patched version?

As Brian Ripley pointed out, the answer is no.  However, others might
want to know that I have been building Windows binaries from the
repository, and those will be available every few days on CRAN (see
http://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/rpatched.html).

Duncan Murdoch


[Rd] Dumb question time - R patched vs. R devel
Duncan Murdoch