I have problem when apply Rib (ver 0.9.1) and Autodispose (ver 1.1.0) libs. My RootActivity (extent RibActivity) cannot resolve "LifecycleScopeProvider". I found that LifecycleScopeProvider not exist in ver 1.1.0 but have in ver 0.2.0.
RIBs are not maintained publicly are are using an old version of the library. You'd need to use the modern names for those items post-1.0.
Related
Here we find 'old' versions of R (from 2.0.1 to 2.7.0).
Here we can find the current version (3.6.3)
Where can we download the versions in between? (i.e. not the newest version, but not 'old')
https://cran.r-project.org/bin/macosx/old contains dmg, pkg and tar.gz files (thanks #MrFlick)
Source files can be found at
https://cran.r-project.org/src/base/R-3/ for 3.x
and
https://cran.r-project.org/src/base/R-2/
for 2.x
I am running R 3.6.1 on a Mac Mini running Sierra and a MacBook Pro running El Capitan. I normally get all the R packages that I need from CRAN or github and use them without issues, but I am trying to install and use an R package (NicheMapR) that requires a fortran compiler and this is giving me issues. Even after installing gfortran, the R package still does not work (the fortran code seems to be compiled but the package installation fails). The package developer suggested that installing R via homebrew might solve the problem. On the contrary, my hunch is that it would lead to a world of pain, to quote Walter from the Big Lebowski. My questions are:
What is the advantage of a homebrew version of R for MacOSX over the "regular" version installed from CRAN?
Can the two versions coexist?
Is the homebrew version going to affect the regular one?
Finally: is homebrew going to help or will it simply open a whole
new can of worms?
Many thanks in advance.
Yes, installing from homebrew is a recipe for pain. It's specifically recommended against by the official CRAN binary maintainer see his remarks from March 2016 on r-sig-mac.
Regarding your questions, this can be summarized as:
What is the advantage of a homebrew version of R for MacOSX over the "regular" version installed from CRAN?
Positives: Select your own BLAS and easily work with geospatial tools.
Downsides: Always needing to compile each R package.
Can the two versions coexist?
Yes. The homebrew version installs into a different directory. But, watch out for library collision (see next question). However, you will have to deal with symbolic linking regarding what version of R is accessible from the console and you will also need to look into using RSwitch to switch between R versions.
Is the homebrew version going to affect the regular one?
Yes, if the library paths overlap. There will be problems regarding package installation and loading. Make sure to setup different library paths. To do so, please look at the .libPaths() documentation.
Finally: is homebrew going to help or will it simply open a whole new can of worms?
Yes and no. Unless you know what you're doing, opt for the CRAN version of R and its assorted goodies.
Say the package was on 1.0.0,
it subsequently releases 1.0.1, and 1.0.2.
But then realize that 1.0.1 contains breaking changes.
So we need to release a 2.0.0 from 1.0.2 doing an empty commit. No problem there.
Then, we need to make a 1.0.3 release that is actually 1.0.0 so that people on 1.0.x will not be affected by the breaking change.
How to do it using semantic-release?
When managing the version manually, it is simple:
checkout 1.0.0, manually update the version to 1.0.3, and publish.
How to do the same using semantic-release?
There is currently no way to do that in an automated fashion. This would be covered once https://github.com/semantic-release/semantic-release/issues/563 is implemented.
Currently the best solution is to do what you described: checkout 1.0.0, manually update the version to 1.0.3, and publish.
I'm trying to learn julia language and I want to install specifically 0.4.2 version of it. When I look at the julia's website, I see that 0.4.3's dmg file is in website, however I was not able to find and download the dmg of 0.4.2 version of julia. How could I do this ?
Yes, you can get it here:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/julialang/bin/osx/x64/0.4/julia-0.4.2-osx10.7+.dmg
Any reason you wanted 0.4.2 rather than the more current 0.4.3?
I'm planning a new build system for our project running on Centos 5.4. I intend to use SCons. I noticed the latest stable SCons version is 2.0.1 while Centos 5.4 comes with 1.2.
I'm new to SCons so I'd like to understand more about the features/stability ratio between the versions.
Would you recommend installing and using the latest version or sticking to what comes from my OS repository?
Since 1.2 the changes have been bug fixes and documentation improvements. There haven't been any new features.
The 2.x version of SCons drops support for Python versions older than 2.4, updating some of the internal code to use newer idioms but without affecting any user visible APIs. That's the reason for the major version number change. If CentOS comes with a recent version of python then this won't affect you either way.
There have been a lot of fixes for newer versions of the various Microsoft compiler versions, but this won't affect a CentOS install.
The bug fixes since SCons 1.2.0 also solve problems in the Fortran, TeX and LaTeX builders. If you make use of Fortran or LaTeX then it would probably be worth upgrading. Otherwise I think you would be hard pushed to spot any day-to-day difference between 1.2.0 and 2.0.1.