You are right. I was too fast and didn't read "last released version". Then the only suspicious thing I see is:
Overall checktime 23 min > 10 min On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 22:25, Ben Bolker <bbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks, but I don't think that's the problem because: > > (1) Those are reported as being from the last released version, not > this one. > (2) As far as I can tell from my local tests, I'm pretty sure I've > fixed these issues in the current release. > (3) In my experience UBSAN tests don't generally get re-run for a > while after the initial CRAN testing anyway ... > > cheers > Ben > > > On 10/12/20 4:23 PM, Iñaki Ucar wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 22:04, Ben Bolker <bbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Before I risk wasting the CRAN maintainers' time with a query, can > >> anyone see what I'm missing here? Everything I can see looks OK, with > >> the possible exception of the 'NA' result for "CRAN incoming > >> feasibility" on r-devel-windows-ix86+x86_64 (which surely isn't my > >> fault???) > >> > >> Any help appreciated, as always. > >> > >> Ben Bolker > > > > There are UBSAN issues: > > > >> Last released version's additional issues: > >> gcc-UBSAN <https://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/bdr/memtests/gcc-UBSAN/lme4> > > -- Iñaki Úcar ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
