Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "r85873".
Did you mean:
685873
2024 Feb 07
2
Difficult debug
...complex: counts,
> loops, etc, the
> only non-base action is a call to Matrix::exp near the end, but the
> which() failure is
> well before that.
>
> The session info just before the offending material:
>
> > sessionInfo()
> R Under development (unstable) (2024-02-07 r85873)
> Platform: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
> Running under: Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS
>
> Matrix products: default
> BLAS: /usr/local/src/R-devel/lib/libRblas.so
> LAPACK: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3.10.0
>
> locale:
> [1] LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 LC_NUMERIC=C
&g...
2024 Feb 07
2
Difficult debug
...ings 'by hand'. ? It does nothing complex: counts, loops, etc, the
only non-base action is a call to Matrix::exp near the end, but the which() failure is
well before that.
The session info just before the offending material:
> sessionInfo()
R Under development (unstable) (2024-02-07 r85873)
Platform: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Running under: Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS
Matrix products: default
BLAS:?? /usr/local/src/R-devel/lib/libRblas.so
LAPACK: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3.10.0
locale:
?[1] LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8?????? LC_NUMERIC=C
?[3] LC_TIME=en_US.UTF-8??????? LC_COLLATE=C...
2024 May 13
0
Change between 86152 and 86534 - probably 86265 - that looks for zspmv in BLAS and not LAPACK causes R with OpenBLAS to fail
...)." [2]
I last successfully compiled v86152 with OpenBLAS 0.3.26 on
2024-03-19. When I compiled 86534 tonight with OPB 0.3.27, I got the
error above. I then tried with OPB 0.3.26?which worked for 86152?and
still got the zspmv error.
I am guessing this relates to revision 86265 "amending r85873: zspmv
is BLAS, not Lapack?" [3].
I built OpenBLAS AND its LAPACK, which takes MUCH MUCH longer, and
tried building R. This time, the build succeeded and passes make
check-devel.
Is there any way to allow the former functionality if the build
recognizes the use of OpenBLAS? Is the only optio...
2024 Feb 08
2
round.Date and trunc.Date not working / implemented
>>>>> Ji?? Moravec
>>>>> on Wed, 7 Feb 2024 10:23:15 +1300 writes:
> This is my first time working with dates, so if the answer is "Duh, work
> with POSIXt", please ignore it.
> Why is not `round.Date` and `trunc.Date` "implemented" for `Date`?
> Is this because `Date` is (mostly) a virtual class setup for a