search for: _build_

FLAC 1.1.2 has been released. See the news item for full details: http://flac.sourceforge.net/news.html#20050205 Thanks to everyone who helped it happen. Josh __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

...t; wrote: > Josh Coalson <xflac@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > FLAC 1.1.2 has been released. See the news item for full details: > > In doc/html, the api documentation is only installed if doxygen is > installed. Is this correct? I thought, doxygen was only required > to _build_ the api docs, but the package already comes with pre-built > docs, doesn't it? yeah, that's the way it's supposed to work but from your mails it sounds like there are still problems. you also said earlier install fails in doc/html if doxygen doesn't exist, right? do you have a...

Hi, Yes I am aware of it. And yes, I have libicu60 installed. Is it the configure script making a mistake? Best, Saren On 11/22/19 4:12 PM, Jeroen Ooms wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 2:58 PM Saren Tasciyan <saren.tasciyan at ist.ac.at> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am trying to build a more recent version (3.6.1 or 3.5.3) of R on >> Ubuntu 18.04 LTS. > Are you

Hello , I am following http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMPass.html this to build a simple pass with in the source tree. When I try to run make command on my pass directory. I am getting following error: ../../../Makefile.common:60: ../../../Makefile.config: No such file or directory ../../../Makefile.common:68: /Makefile.rules: No such file or directory make: *** No rule to make target

...... Done > > r-base-dev is already the newest version (3.5.2-1cosmic). > > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. > > OK~/Downloads/R-devel > > I would just run this > > apt-get build-dep r-base > > that will install all packages needed to _build_ r-base, so including PCRE. > > Best > Tomas > > > > > config.log gives me: > > > > configure:42208: $? = 0 > > configure:42208: result: yes > > configure:42208: checking for pcre.h > > configure:42208: result: yes > > configure:42208: chec...

...... Done > > r-base-dev is already the newest version (3.5.2-1cosmic). > > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. > > OK~/Downloads/R-devel > > I would just run this > > apt-get build-dep r-base > > that will install all packages needed to _build_ r-base, so including PCRE. > > Best > Tomas > > > > > config.log gives me: > > > > configure:42208: $? = 0 > > configure:42208: result: yes > > configure:42208: checking for pcre.h > > configure:42208: result: yes > > configure:42208: chec...

Hi, During my recent r2sundials development, I've came across a strange test failing during 'R CMD check' exclusively on win R-devel which I could reproduce with a minimal example that I present here. The toy packages testarma1 [1] and testarma2 [2] are minimal modifications of a skeleton package produced by RcppArmadillo.package.skeleton(). They are almost identical. The first

...me light on the original reasons for the deprecation? What are the risks to go with squat anyway? Clucene: That seems .. unusable. It would be my prefered choice (not deprecated, little dependencies), but .. it isn't packaged in deb based distributions (Debian, Ubuntu). It doesn't even _build_, because it doesn't use pkg-config to find the clucene includes (at least for 2.1.17) in these environments. Centos is even more out of date with 2.0.9. Given the experience above, is solr my only option to offer FTS? Can you guys share how you're having a stable base/os with a somewha...

thanks for this guys. I only compiled pcre myself as a last resort, because of the ./configure failure. But AFAICS apt-get reports correct installation: OK~/Downloads/R-devel sudo apt-get install r-base-dev Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done r-base-dev is already the newest version (3.5.2-1cosmic). 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to

thanks for this guys. I only compiled pcre myself as a last resort, because of the ./configure failure. But AFAICS apt-get reports correct installation: OK~/Downloads/R-devel sudo apt-get install r-base-dev Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done r-base-dev is already the newest version (3.5.2-1cosmic). 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to

...base-dev is already the newest version (3.5.2-1cosmic). >>> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. >>> OK~/Downloads/R-devel >> I would just run this >> >> apt-get build-dep r-base >> >> that will install all packages needed to _build_ r-base, so including PCRE. >> >> Best >> Tomas >> >>> config.log gives me: >>> >>> configure:42208: $? = 0 >>> configure:42208: result: yes >>> configure:42208: checking for pcre.h >>> configure:42208: result: yes >&gt...

...base-dev is already the newest version (3.5.2-1cosmic). >>> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. >>> OK~/Downloads/R-devel >> I would just run this >> >> apt-get build-dep r-base >> >> that will install all packages needed to _build_ r-base, so including PCRE. >> >> Best >> Tomas >> >>> config.log gives me: >>> >>> configure:42208: $? = 0 >>> configure:42208: result: yes >>> configure:42208: checking for pcre.h >>> configure:42208: result: yes >&gt...

...e missing here is to distinguish between _build-time_ needs (we call that Build-Depends: in Debian) and _run_time_ needs. We currently only have the latter as Depends:, which for example pains a million dplyr users on Windows who have to download 120mb worth of our BH package because it is used to _build_ the binary zipfile, but not thereafter. That is a wart. Now, _LinkingTo_ always implies build-dependecies or else it would croak at that stage. And I had assumed that this would cover all run-time but ... | Instead, one have to add it to 'Suggests:' field too. ... tests are indeed trea...

...ndency tree > Reading state information... Done > r-base-dev is already the newest version (3.5.2-1cosmic). > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. > OK~/Downloads/R-devel I would just run this apt-get build-dep r-base that will install all packages needed to _build_ r-base, so including PCRE. Best Tomas > > config.log gives me: > > configure:42208: $? = 0 > configure:42208: result: yes > configure:42208: checking for pcre.h > configure:42208: result: yes > configure:42208: checking pcre/pcre.h usability > configure:42208: gcc -c -...

...ion (3.5.2-1cosmic). > >>> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. > >>> OK~/Downloads/R-devel > >> I would just run this > >> > >> apt-get build-dep r-base > >> > >> that will install all packages needed to _build_ r-base, so including PCRE. > >> > >> Best > >> Tomas > >> > >>> config.log gives me: > >>> > >>> configure:42208: $? = 0 > >>> configure:42208: result: yes > >>> configure:42208: checking for pcre.h >...

I'm mystified by a Windoze ``phenomenon'' which has just bitten me. I have a laptop which boots either Windoze or Linux; I (sad to say) need the Windoze OS for teaching purposes. I have R 1.9.1 installed on the laptop in the Windoze OS. Just now I decided to install, under the Windoze version of R, a library (``Misc'') of some local functions that I have collected over the

...d, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. >> >>> OK~/Downloads/R-devel >> >> I would just run this >> >> >> >> apt-get build-dep r-base >> >> >> >> that will install all packages needed to _build_ r-base, so including PCRE. >> >> >> >> Best >> >> Tomas >> >> >> >>> config.log gives me: >> >>> >> >>> configure:42208: $? = 0 >> >>> configure:42208: result:...

On Tue, 2015-09-08 at 15:03 +0000, Antti Kantee wrote: > For unikernels, the rump kernel project provides Rumprun, which can > provide you with a near-full POSIX'y interface. I'm not 100% clear: Does rumprun _build_ or _run_ the application? It sound s like it builds but the name suggests otherwise. > Rumprun also provides > toolchain wrappers so that you can compile existing programs as Rumprun > unikernels. Do these wrappers make a rump kernel build target look just like any other ross build t...

On 08/09/15 16:15, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Tue, 2015-09-08 at 15:03 +0000, Antti Kantee wrote: > >> For unikernels, the rump kernel project provides Rumprun, which can >> provide you with a near-full POSIX'y interface. > > I'm not 100% clear: Does rumprun _build_ or _run_ the application? It sound > s like it builds but the name suggests otherwise. For all practical purposes, Rumprun is an OS, except that you always cross-compile for it. So, I'd say "yes", but it depends on how you want to interpret the situation. We could spend days w...

Hello everyone, First of all, great job on the 4.8-R. We have been a long standing user of FreeBSD and are very happy with everything. Now my question. I am trying to stress test a new Dell PowerEdge server and find the limits of its hardware and my tuning. Here are the server stats: * 2x Xeon 2.8 with SMP compiled, hyperthreading NOT compiled in kernel * 4 GB of RAM, 8 GB of swap on Raid 1