On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:00 AM, Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, hadley wickham wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Prof Brian Ripley >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, hadley wickham wrote: >>> >>>> In R 2.8. I get the following warning when checking my package: >>>> >>>> * checking for executable files ... WARNING >>>> Found the following executable file(s): >>>> .git/objects/00/12947a4bb4379fb0c3bed740314a9f4ac72331 >>>> .git/objects/00/21fac22a57a1567389ed34a9dc4f465c6cfd01 >>>> .git/objects/00/29da5c289489fdb2249e19f4b165ff5b37b3e6 >>>> .git/objects/00/36ad7f586eeac250e6609a1bf938e545101cb0 >>>> ... (for about 300 lines) >>>> >>>> I've tried putting .git in my .Rbuildignore, but this doesn't help the >>>> problem. Any ideas? >>> >>> Does 'R CMD build' a tarball and then 'R CMD check' not solve this? >>> 'build' skips git files, and you only need to worry about executables in >>> a >>> tarball you ship. >> >> Is this suggested best practice now? > > Always was, AFAIK.
I might be useful to make this more explicit in "Writing R extensions". A sentence at the start of 1.3.1 "checking packages" would be helpful, as would removing this sentence from 1.3.2: "Run-time checks whether the package works correctly should be performed using R CMD check prior to invoking the build procedure." and strengthening the recommendation in this sentence: "It can be useful to run R CMD check --check-subdirs=yes on the built tarball as a final check on the contents." You didn't mention "--check-subdirs=yes" and I see from R CMD CHECK --help that yes is now the default, so perhaps that could be removed too. Hadley -- http://had.co.nz/ ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
