Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default
On 07/08/16 15:18, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition.
>
> I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition policy:
>
> -- the "R" language (source package r-base) encodes its configuration time
> choices for all subsequent compilations; here we have CXX and CXX1X (plus
> CXX1Y in next release)
>
> -- this could be overwritten but it easiest just to rebuild R
>
> -- R itself is largely C and Fortran and will not be affected
>
> -- C++ packages will. I am also upstream of the somewhat-widely used C++
> interface in package Rcpp (source package rcpp). We need to rebuild it,
> and then all packages dependending on it. See [1] below. There may also
Why do all the rdeps need to be rebuilt? I'm not even sure I understand why rcpp
needs to be rebuilt...
> be one or two C++ packages not using Rcpp such as r-cran-mcmcpack. I can
> weed those out by hand by running a script over rdepends for R as
> well. Actually just filtering rdepends for C++ works, see [2]
>
> -- Ditto for the QuantLib library (depending on Boost) and r-cran-rquantlib
> though that is a small leaf
>
> Is this "small potatos" and something I should organize informally with the
> package maintainers, or something you want to coordinate?
>
> I CC'ed Doko and Martin has I have been discussing an open bug report (which
> is somewhat false positive) concerning r-cran-rquantlib; this is really just
> the need for the same C++ compiler between R, Rcpp, QuantLib and RQuantLib
> (which this transition would achieve too).
>
> Let me know if I should take this to debian-devel or some other list.
Can you summarise all this? I didn't quite understand what is required...
What is needed here, binNMUs for a bunch of packages so they are built with the
same compiler? Why? Does the ABI change and thus is a library transition needed?
Thanks,
Emilio
Reply to: