>>>>> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:56:27 -0400,
>>>>> Duncan Murdoch (DM) wrote:
> On 4/11/2006 7:45 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>> R-devel'ers,
>>
>> On 11 April 2006 at 10:24, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>> |
>> | Kanru,
>> |
>> | Thanks for the bugreport.
>> |
>> | On 11 April 2006 at 22:03, Kanru Chen wrote:
>> | | Package: r-base-core
>> | | Version: 2.2.1.svn37668-1
>> | | Severity: minor
>> | |
>> | | In manpage of /usr/bin/R, the first, fourth and last line shows
`VERSION'
>> | | instead of `R'.
>>
>> I haven't seen any follow-up yet -- here is what it looks like (cut and
>> pasted from Emacs man page viewer) and note the 'Version' in place of R:
>>
>> VERSION(1) FSF
VERSION(1)
>>
>> NAME
>> Version - a language for data analysis and graphics
>>
>> SYNOPSIS
>> R [options] [< infile] [> outfile]
>> R CMD command [arguments]
>>
>> DESCRIPTION
>> Start R, a system for statistical computation and graphics, with the
>> specified options, or invoke an R tool via the 'R CMD' interface.
>> [...]
>>
>>
>> | | I believe it is a typo.
>> |
>> | More likely something is wrong with how R.1 is autogenerated using
help2man.
>> |
>> | Incidentally, that `R --version' now starts its ouput with 'Version'
rather
>> | than R had bit us in the RPy builds where the version number was
regexp'ed
>> | out of the result, and was still expecting the line to start with R just
like
>> | help2man seems to expect the program name first.
>>
>> It seems to stem from src/main/version.c:
>>
>> void attribute_hidden PrintVersionString(char *s)
>> {
>> if(strcmp(R_SVN_REVISION, "unknown")==0)
>> {
>> sprintf(s, "Version %s.%s %s (%s-%s-%s)",
>> R_MAJOR, R_MINOR, R_STATUS, R_YEAR, R_MONTH, R_DAY);
>> }
>> else{
>> if(strlen(R_STATUS)==0){
>> sprintf(s, "Version %s.%s (%s-%s-%s)",
>> R_MAJOR, R_MINOR, R_YEAR, R_MONTH, R_DAY);
>> }
>> else{
>> sprintf(s, "Version %s.%s %s (%s-%s-%s r%s)",
>> R_MAJOR, R_MINOR, R_STATUS, R_YEAR, R_MONTH, R_DAY,
>> R_SVN_REVISION);
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> Would replacing 'Version ...' with 'R (Version ...)' be an acceptable
>> alternative ?
> I think the problem is that PrintVersion (a few lines up from there)
> used to put the R in front; PrintVersionString doesn't include the R.
> PrintVersionString is called from other places where the R would not be
> appropriate, but PrintVersion is only called when acting on `R
> --version' or synonyms.
> Fritz, I think this was your change in r36923 a few months ago. Do you
> have time to deal with it?
Yes, will do later today.
Best,
Fritz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
