From hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk  Tue Jan 16 14:55:51 2007
From: hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk (Hin-Tak Leung)
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 13:55:51 +0000
Subject: [Rd] mingw-cross with R 2.4.x Re: wine and build difference
 between R.2.4.0 and R 2.4.1 windows binaries?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701161256530.18855@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
References: <45A53E92.6070104@cimr.cam.ac.uk> <45A545B1.6070508@stats.uwo.ca>
	<45A6250C.3020802@cimr.cam.ac.uk> <45A629E0.8090100@stats.uwo.ca>
	<45A79EB8.8010606@cimr.cam.ac.uk>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0701121446340.11132@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
	<45A7BF93.1090109@cimr.cam.ac.uk> <45A7CE6F.2050103@stats.uwo.ca>
	<45A7D2C3.1050204@cimr.cam.ac.uk> <45ABCCBF.3080204@cimr.cam.ac.uk>
	<45ACA559.5010909@cimr.cam.ac.uk> <45ACC982.3000207@cimr.cam.ac.uk>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0701161256530.18855@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <45ACD967.2010100@cimr.cam.ac.uk>

Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
> 
>> Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>> <wine failed to load mingw 3.11 compiled R 2.4.1>
>>> The issue is filed as http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7181
>>
>> One of the main wine developers, Alexandre Julliard, closed the bug
>> with a patch. I'll patch my wine and see... pretty good going to resolve
>> a bug within a day...(if the patch works).
> 
> I suspect R's median bug resolution time is about that.  (For non-spam 
> reported bugs it certainly is, as around 50% are not bugs in R.)

Possibly - but then, most bugs in most medium size software are
shallow (wine's code base is 11MB bz'ed, while R is 15GB gz'ed,
so they are probably comparable in size/complexity, other than wine is a 
bit harder having to imitate a "black-box operation") - the upper
quantile or something further up might be a more interesting
measure :-).

My patched wine rpm build has finished, and I can confirm that I can
now launch 2.4.1 and 2.5dev with it.

Thanks.
Hin-Tak



[Rd] mingw-cross with R 2.4.x Re: wine and build difference between R.2.4.0 and R 2.4.1 windows binaries?
Hin-Tak Leung