Hi, I just downloaded R for windows and subscribed to this list. I would like to know if it is possible to install an add-on package (e.g. spatial) in the Win95 version (0.61.1). Thank you, Pierre ======================================= Pierre Vernier Research Associate / GIS Coordinator Centre for Applied Conservation Biology Forest Sciences, UBC Phone 1: (604) 822-8288 Phone 2: (604) 948-9181 Fax: (604) 822-5410 Email: vernier at unixg.ubc.ca ======================================= -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
No subject
7 messages · vernier@unixg.ubc.ca, Thomas Lumley, Göran Broström +2 more
On Fri, 8 May 1998 vernier at unixg.ubc.ca wrote:
Hi, I just downloaded R for windows and subscribed to this list. I would like to know if it is possible to install an add-on package (e.g. spatial) in the Win95 version (0.61.1).
It's possible in theory. The procedure is sort of explained in the source for the new windows version. The package needs to be compiled as a DLL and linked with the R executable if it uses any R functions like S_alloc. There's a MakePkg script in the src/gnuwin32 directory, but it requires the mingw32 compiler and quite a lot of GNU tools for NT/Win95. Thomas Lumley ------------------------------------------------------+------ Biostatistics : "Never attribute to malice what : Uni of Washington : can be adequately explained by : Box 357232 : incompetence" - Hanlon's Razor : Seattle WA 98195-7232 : : ------------------------------------------------------------ -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
3 days later
I have Linux, Redhat 4.2, on two machines, an i586 and a Sparc. When I compile R-0.61.3 on them, everything is fine on i586, but on the Sparc I get, in the last linking stage: ../lib/libunix.a(system.o): In function `main': /usr/local/R-0.61.3/src/unix/system.c:353: undefined reference to `__setfpucw' ../lib/libunix.a(system.o): In function `R_CleanUp': /usr/local/R-0.61.3/src/unix/system.c:430: undefined reference to `__setfpucw' make[2]: *** [R.binary] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/R-0.61.3/src/main' make[1]: *** [build] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/R-0.61.3/src' make: *** [install] Error 2 Any ideas? Goran --------------------------------------------------------- Goran Brostrom Department of Statistics tel: +46 90 786-5223 Umea University fax: +46 90 786-6614 S-90187 Umea, Sweden e-mail: gb at stat.umu.se ---------------------------------------------------------- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
Goran Brostrom <gb at stat.umu.se> writes:
I have Linux, Redhat 4.2, on two machines, an i586 and a Sparc. When I compile R-0.61.3 on them, everything is fine on i586, but on the Sparc I get, in the last linking stage: ../lib/libunix.a(system.o): In function `main': /usr/local/R-0.61.3/src/unix/system.c:353: undefined reference to `__setfpucw' ../lib/libunix.a(system.o): In function `R_CleanUp': /usr/local/R-0.61.3/src/unix/system.c:430: undefined reference to `__setfpucw'
Using __setfpucw is a horrible hack in the first place... You could try simply commenting it out. Or study <fpu_control.h> and guess what the mechanism is supposed to be on Sparc Linux. On i386 with RH4.2, _FPU_DEFAULT == _FPU_IEEE, so the __setfpucw() is a no-op anyway. (Earlier Linuxen would unmask exceptions invalid-op, zero-div, and overflow - halting programs at inconvenient times).
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3 c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk) FAX: (+45) 35327907 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
On 12 May 1998, Peter Dalgaard BSA wrote:
Goran Brostrom <gb at stat.umu.se> writes:
I have Linux, Redhat 4.2, on two machines, an i586 and a Sparc. When I compile R-0.61.3 on them, everything is fine on i586, but on the Sparc I get, in the last linking stage: ../lib/libunix.a(system.o): In function `main': /usr/local/R-0.61.3/src/unix/system.c:353: undefined reference to `__setfpucw' ../lib/libunix.a(system.o): In function `R_CleanUp': /usr/local/R-0.61.3/src/unix/system.c:430: undefined reference to `__setfpucw'
Using __setfpucw is a horrible hack in the first place... You could try simply commenting it out. Or study <fpu_control.h> and guess what the mechanism is supposed to be on Sparc Linux.
I commented out two (identical) lines in src/unix/system.c: /* __setfpucw(_FPU_DEFAULT); */ and the compilation worked alright. The file /usr/include/fpu_control.h: #ifndef _FPU_CONTROL_H #define _FPU_CONTROL_H #if defined(__i386__) # include <i386/fpu_control.h> #elif defined(__mc68000__) # include <m68k/fpu_control.h> #elif defined(__sparc__) # include <sparc/fpu_control.h> #else # error architecture not supported by Linux C library #endif #endif /* _FPU_CONTROL_H */ Is __sparc__ automatically defined? In sparc/fpu_control.h there is a line extern void __setfpucw __P ((unsigned short)); but __setfpucw doesn't seem to be defined somewhere. I don't understand the significance of all this, but maybe it doesn't matter? Goran --------------------------------------------------------- Goran Brostrom Department of Statistics tel: +46 90 786-5223 Umea University fax: +46 90 786-6614 S-90187 Umea, Sweden e-mail: gb at stat.umu.se ---------------------------------------------------------- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
Goran Brostrom <gb at stat.umu.se> writes:
Is __sparc__ automatically defined? In sparc/fpu_control.h there is a line extern void __setfpucw __P ((unsigned short)); but __setfpucw doesn't seem to be defined somewhere. I don't understand the significance of all this, but maybe it doesn't matter?
Did you use something like an NFS mount of a file system to share the same sources between the two machines? If you did the configuration on the Linux machine and kept around a config.cache file, it may have used some information from the Linux machine in configuring the compilation for the SPARC. I would advise trying the configure/compile sequence again on the SPARC but using a clean set of source files direct from the .tar.gz archive. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
On 12 May 1998, Douglas Bates wrote:
Goran Brostrom <gb at stat.umu.se> writes:
Is __sparc__ automatically defined? In sparc/fpu_control.h there is a line extern void __setfpucw __P ((unsigned short)); but __setfpucw doesn't seem to be defined somewhere. I don't understand the significance of all this, but maybe it doesn't matter?
Did you use something like an NFS mount of a file system to share the same sources between the two machines? If you did the configuration on the Linux machine and kept around a config.cache file, it may have used some information from the Linux machine in configuring the compilation for the SPARC. I would advise trying the configure/compile sequence again on the SPARC but using a clean set of source files direct from the .tar.gz archive.
Actually, the two compiles were done completely independent of each other, as you propose. Each machine had its own copy of the source tree. Goran --------------------------------------------------------- Goran Brostrom Department of Statistics tel: +46 90 786-5223 Umea University fax: +46 90 786-6614 S-90187 Umea, Sweden e-mail: gb at stat.umu.se ---------------------------------------------------------- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._