Skip to content

SVN revision numbers

5 messages · Cyrus Harmon, Brian Ripley

#
You will start to see SVN revision numbers appearing in the the R-devel 
version of R, for example

    R : Copyright 2005, The R Foundation for Statistical Computing
    Version 2.2.0 Under development (unstable) (2005-05-18 r34401)
    ISBN 3-900051-07-0

This has been done to enable us to track more precisely the sources used 
to build R: the date stamp is imprecise and sometimes gets to be wrong in 
a tarball.

Users building from snapshot tarballs will see this as from tomorrow.

Windows users who used an SVN checkout will see this with immediate 
effect.

Unix-alike users who use an SVN checkout currently will only see
something like:
_
platform i686-pc-linux-gnu
arch     i686
os       linux-gnu
system   i686, linux-gnu
status   Under development (unstable)
major    2
minor    2.0
year     2005
month    05
day      18
svn rev  unknown
language R

as we still have to decide what to do if e.g. an NFS-mounted SVN checkout 
is used on a machine without SVN.  (In principle that can be done on 
Windows and it is supposed to be working there, but we don't feel the need 
to test it on Windows but do under Unix.)
#
I'm seeing an error about not being able to find SVN-REVISION in the  
R (top src dir) when I try to build from current SVN sources. Is this  
a file that is supposed to be generated that I'm not generating for  
some reason, or is this supposed to be in the SVN repository?

My apologies if I'm catching the repository in an unstable state and  
this is a known problem.

Thanks,

Cyrus
On May 18, 2005, at 5:52 AM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:

            
#
Following up on my own post... touching non-tarball and then doing a  
make fixes the problem. I assume this is documented somewhere and I  
just missed it.

Cyrus
On May 18, 2005, at 1:36 PM, Cyrus Harmon wrote:

            
#
On Wed, 18 May 2005, Cyrus Harmon wrote:

            
The make process does touch non-tarball: you may need to start from a 
clean build.  (BTW, that's not new.)

  
    
#
On Wed, 18 May 2005, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:

            
I have tested a clean build with both srcdir=builddir and 
srcdir!=builddir, and both behaved flawlessly.  I was also able to update 
several other builds from a day to a month old.