Building from source problems.

QUESTION 1:
===========

Yesterday I sent out a cri de coeur in respect of not being
able to build R 2.10.0 from source on my Mac (OS X 10.4.11).

Simon Urbanek informed me that I could get a working R 2.10.0
from http://r.research.att.com/ which I duly did.  That went
O.K.

Then today, because of another problem that I encountered (see
below) I decided to go back to R 2.9.2.  I retrieved the
tar file from the ``Source code of older versions of R'' and
went through the ./configure and make routine.  Blow me down,
but didn't I get the same error that I got when trying to make
version 2.10.0:

building package 'tcltk'
mkdir ../../../library/tcltk
mkdir ../../../library/tcltk/R
mkdir ../../../library/tcltk/exec
mkdir ../../../library/tcltk/po
mkdir ../../../library/tcltk/man
making init.d from init.c
making tcltk.d from tcltk.c
making tcltk_unix.d from tcltk_unix.c
gcc -std=gnu99 -I../../../../include -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/ 
local/include  -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/sw/include -I/usr/local/ 
include    -fPIC  -g -O2 -c init.c -o init.o
gcc -std=gnu99 -I../../../../include -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/ 
local/include  -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/sw/include -I/usr/local/ 
include    -fPIC  -g -O2 -c tcltk.c -o tcltk.o
gcc -std=gnu99 -I../../../../include -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/ 
local/include  -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/sw/include -I/usr/local/ 
include    -fPIC  -g -O2 -c tcltk_unix.c -o tcltk_unix.o
In file included from tcltk_unix.c:23:
../../../../include/R_ext/eventloop.h:73: warning: 'struct timeval'  
declared inside parameter list
../../../../include/R_ext/eventloop.h:73: warning: its scope is  
only this definition or declaration, which is probably not what you  
want
gcc -std=gnu99 -dynamiclib -Wl,-headerpad_max_install_names - 
mmacosx-version-min=10.4 -undefined dynamic_lookup -single_module - 
multiply_defined suppress -L/sw/lib -L/usr/local/lib -o tcltk.so  
init.o tcltk.o tcltk_unix.o -L/usr/local/lib -ltcl8.5 -L/usr/local/ 
lib -ltk8.5 -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lX11 -Wl,-weak-lXss -lXext - 
L../../../../lib -lR -dylib_file libRblas.dylib:../../../../lib/ 
libRblas.dylib -lintl -liconv -lc -Wl,-framework -Wl,CoreFoundation
/usr/libexec/gcc/i686-apple-darwin8/4.0.1/libtool: for architecture  
x86_64 object: /usr/local/lib/libtk8.5.dylib malformed object  
(unknown load command 7)
make[4]: *** [tcltk.so] Error 1
make[3]: *** [all] Error 1
make[2]: *** [R] Error 1
make[1]: *** [R] Error 1
make: *** [R] Error 1

Simon told me that the error that arose when I tried to make 2.10.0  
was
due to trying to build a 64 bit version under a too-ancient version of
Mac OS X.  Is the 2.9.2 release configured to produce a 64 bit  
version?
I ***thought*** I had installed 2.9.2 from source, but maybe not ....

Is there any way I can tell it ***not*** to go for a 64-bit version?
(Surely there must be, since the r.research.att web site provides a
version which runs under Mac OS X 10.4.11.)

QUESTION 2:
===========

The reason that I decided to go back to R 2.9.2 was that I tried to
install the contributed package spatstat (version 1.17.0) from source
and got an error:

gcc -arch i386 -std=gnu99 -I/Library/Frameworks/R.framework/ 
Resources/include -I/Library/Frameworks/R.framework/Resources/ 
include/i386  -I/usr/local/include    -fPIC  -mtune=core2 -g -O2 -c  
Kborder.c -o Kborder.o
Kborder.c:1: error: bad value (core2) for -mtune= switch
make: *** [Kborder.o] Error 1
ERROR: compilation failed for package 'spatstat'

I thought this error must have resulted from the upgrade to 2.10.0.   
However
when I finally succeeded in backing off to 2.9.2 (by getting a  
binary from
the r.research.att site) I got exactly the same error under 2.9.2.

What is this error all about?  What can I do about it?  Is there any  
flag
I can set for configure (???) that will get rid that -mtune=core2 in
the call to gcc?  What is ``mtune'' all about?  What does ``core2''  
mean?

Sheesh! :-)

Thanks for any enlightenment.

	cheers,

		Rolf Turner



######################################################################
Attention:\ This e-mail message is privileged and confid...{{dropped: 
9}}