On Feb 6, 2013, at 10:29 , Martin Maechler wrote:
>> "PJ" == Paul Johnson
>>on Tue, 5 Feb 2013 22:25:01 -0600 writes:
>
>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Simon Urbanek
>> wrote:
>>> As Peter pointed out earlier, this is better addressed by
>>> disabling the Tcl/Tk event loop in fo
> "PJ" == Paul Johnson
> on Tue, 5 Feb 2013 22:25:01 -0600 writes:
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Simon Urbanek
> wrote:
>> As Peter pointed out earlier, this is better addressed by
>> disabling the Tcl/Tk event loop in forked processes.
>>
> Dear Simon:
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Simon Urbanek
wrote:
> As Peter pointed out earlier, this is better addressed by disabling the
> Tcl/Tk event loop in forked processes.
>
Dear Simon:
I don't understand. Can you please try to say it again?
I find Peter's comment (on Jan 3, 2013, thread title: we
Hi Simon,
Sorry to be a bother, but is "disabling the Tcl/Tk event loop in the forked
processes" something that a package maintainer should do? If so, how?
Again, apologies if I've missed something obvious.
I maintain a package (Amelia) that has an optional tcltk GUI that folks can
use and we are
As Peter pointed out earlier, this is better addressed by disabling the Tcl/Tk
event loop in forked processes.
Cheers,
Simon
On Feb 2, 2013, at 5:02 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Dear R-devel friends:
>
> I'm back to bother you again about the conflict between mclapply and
> tcltk. I've been
> mon
