2011/6/11 Prof Brian Ripley :
> Note that until May 8 graph was a CRAN packge and the current version was
> 1.30.0. So of course CRAN binary packages built between April 26 and May 8
> were built against the current CRAN version of graph, for any version of R.
Thanks for the notice! But if I am n
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011, Kornelius Rohmeyer wrote:
2011/6/11 Prof Brian Ripley :
Note that until May 8 graph was a CRAN packge and the current version was
1.30.0. So of course CRAN binary packages built between April 26 and May 8
were built against the current CRAN version of graph, for any versio
2011/6/11 Prof Brian Ripley :
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011, Kornelius Rohmeyer wrote:
>> 2011/6/11 Prof Brian Ripley :
>>> Note that until May 8 graph was a CRAN packge and the current version was
>>> 1.30.0. So of course CRAN binary packages built between April 26 and May
>>> 8
>>> were built against th
Actually I do not understand what is so hard to understand with CRAN policy.
This is:
Any source package on CRAN is build in binary form with
R-release/patched and R-oldrelease. This does not happen if you tell
your package it requires a particular R version - such as the
declaration R (>= 2.1
On 11-06-11 1:09 AM, Kornelius Rohmeyer wrote:
2011/6/11 Duncan Murdoch:
On 11-06-10 7:04 PM, Kornelius Rohmeyer wrote:
Dear all,
for a CRAN-package that depends on another Bioconductor-package I find
two things annoying and would like to know whether there are some
workarounds:
1) Is there s
I'm working on a mechanism that will download GTK+ (the official zip files)
into a predetermined location and put that location in front of the other
paths at load time. Hopefully this will resolve these continuing issues.
Michael
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 6:07 AM, Janko Thyson <
janko.thyson.rst.
