From ggrothendieck at gmail.com  Sat Sep 10 15:19:08 2005
From: ggrothendieck at gmail.com (Gabor Grothendieck)
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 09:19:08 -0400
Subject: [Rd] R.version.string (Re: MikTeX will be assumed in R 2.2.0 in
	Windows)
In-Reply-To: <4322C517.4020806@stats.uwo.ca>
References: <43223809.7000306@stats.uwo.ca>
	<971536df050909190441a98acb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4322C517.4020806@stats.uwo.ca>
Message-ID: <971536df050910061939711dab@mail.gmail.com>

On 9/10/05, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch at stats.uwo.ca> wrote:
> Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
> > On 9/9/05, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch at stats.uwo.ca> wrote:
> >
> >>I've just committed some changes to allow R to be built and to use
> >>MikTeX without needing the Rd.sty files to be installed to localtexmf.
> >>Unfortunately, the changes are not compatible with other TeX packages,
> >>so if you're not using MikTeX you'll need to edit a couple of the config
> >>files (or set an environment variable).
> >>
> >>I'd appreciate hearing of any problems during the alpha or beta test period.
> >>
> >>A binary build containing the changes should be on CRAN tomorrow or the
> >>next day.  Look for revision 35546 or higher.
> >
> >
> > Note that R.version.string in R 2.2.0 2005-09-03 does not give
> > this sort of version information.  If we are going to use this style
> > I suggest we modify R.version.string accordingly.
> 
> You can get the revision number from the startup banner if you download
> a binary build.
> 
> Duncan Murdoch
> 
> 

I normally document what version I am using by displaying R.version.string.
If R.version.string is no longer definitive under 2.2.0 then it either needs to
be modified so that it is or we need some other way of getting that
capability.



[Rd] R.version.string (Re: MikTeX will be assumed in R 2.2.0 in Windows)
Gabor Grothendieck