On 7/13/2022 3:08 PM, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 09:03:32PM +0200, Rafael Sadowski wrote:
>> On Tue Jul 12, 2022 at 04:23:22PM +0100, Zé Loff wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Brian
>>>
>>> Due to R's bump of libR, RStudio's port needs tweaking.
>>> Patch attached.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Zé
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>
>>> Index: patches/patch-src_cpp_core_r_util_REnvironmentPosix_cpp
>>> ===================================================================
>>> RCS file:
>>> /cvs/ports/math/rstudio/patches/patch-src_cpp_core_r_util_REnvironmentPosix_cpp,v
>>> retrieving revision 1.2
>>> diff -u -p -r1.2 patch-src_cpp_core_r_util_REnvironmentPosix_cpp
>>> --- patches/patch-src_cpp_core_r_util_REnvironmentPosix_cpp 11 Mar 2022
>>> 19:36:31 -0000 1.2
>>> +++ patches/patch-src_cpp_core_r_util_REnvironmentPosix_cpp 12 Jul 2022
>>> 13:04:35 -0000
>>> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ Index: src/cpp/core/r_util/REnvironmentP
>>> #else
>>>
>>> -#define kLibRFileName "libR.so"
>>> -+#define kLibRFileName "libR.so.37.0"
>>> ++#define kLibRFileName "libR.so.38.0"
>>> #define kLibraryPathEnvVariable "LD_LIBRARY_PATH"
>>>
>>> FilePath systemDefaultRScript(std::string* pErrMsg)
>>
>> With a bump, OK rsadowski. Fun fact, there is a comment for this case in
>> the Makefile :)
>>
>
> Would such a comment not make more sense in math/R/Makefile similar
> to what's done in security/openssl/{1.1,3.0}/Makefile ?
>
No objections here. I don't remember why we didn't do that in the first
place.
~Brian
