On Feb 10 10:52, marco atzeri wrote: > On 2/10/2012 10:11 AM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > >On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 07:30 +0100, marco atzeri wrote: > >>On 2/10/2012 4:37 AM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > >>>Furthermore, is there a reason you use libRblas/libRlapack instead of > >>>the system lapack libraries? > >> > >>A tough discussion with R developers. They consider the standard Blas > >>crippled as non correctly handling NaN. > >> > >>For what I saw they have the tendency to make their own version of any > >>lib that does not fit on their exact expectation, for the same reason > >>they do not consider libtool and have a very unusual build. > > > >Bundling libs is usually a bad idea, and as Debian, Fedora, and Gentoo > >all seem to use the system lapack, I'd suggest to do so as well (as done > >in Ports). > > > > > >Yaakov > > > > the request was a bit strong > https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2011-November/062565.html > > It seems R is assuming math for NaN is a must.
Question: Are the lapack packages for Debian, Fedora, and Gentoo less broken than the Cygwin ones? If so, why? Is that just a version problem which can be fixed by updating the package or is it due to the underlying implementation of some math functions in newlib? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
