On 23.11.2020 04:13, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal wrote:
I have found win-builder timings come close, but only close. My experience is
that the CRAN timings were uniformly slower than those on win-builder. But I
also find that I can get quite significant differences between
win-builder-release and win-builder-devel. So I also take the slowest that I
can find as a basis, and assume the actual times will be slower than that.
winbuilder and the WIndows check machione for the regulöar checks are
actually identical.
Best,
Uwe Ligges
HTH,
-Roy
On Nov 22, 2020, at 5:15 PM, Ben Bolker <bbol...@gmail.com> wrote:
And one more (last for a while): presumably there is no way to check CRAN
windows timing without submitting to CRAN ... ? (I will obviously do my best by
doing arithmetic on the tests that I set to be skipped, but it would be nice to be
able to double-check without wasting everyone's time ... I guess if I knew that
CRAN submissions would *always automatically* be rejected with Windows test
times>10 min, I could use CRAN submission itself as my test ... but maybe
that's a bad idea?)
On 11/22/20 4:06 PM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Thanks Dirk. Yes, for lme4 the tests for each archiecture take longer than 5
min, so the overall check time exceeds 10 min.
So one can follow Dirk's advise.
As a general remark for others who will read this in the future:
tests should test the software, but it is generally not important to have real
world examples. Small data and few iterations are typically sufficient for
tests.
It is also possible to run less important tests only conditionally if some
environment variable is set that you only define on your machine.
Best,
Uwe Ligges
On 22.11.2020 20:36, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 22 November 2020 at 13:44, Ben Bolker wrote:
| My current guess is that the problem is with the too-long check time on Windows (NOTE:
"Overall checktime 18 min > 10 min")
Yes.
| I guess I have to get busy setting more tests and examples to skip-on-CRAN
(kind of a pain as there's no low-hanging fruit - other than the 'testthat'
tests, none of the individual test files take longer than 15sec, although this
is doubled because they have to be run on 386 and x64 ...)
It's under your control. You can detect 'are we on Windows' and branch or, as
I do with test runner I use, exit_file("...") based on such conditions.
| An alternative is that this is a confusingly worded message indicating that
there are strong rev dependencies so the package needs to be further checked?
(That seems unlikely as it explicitly asks me to resubmit)
No. If there were any (even false positive ones) they'd be listed there.
Hth, Dirk
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
**********************
"The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or
NOAA."
**********************
Roy Mendelssohn
Supervisory Operations Research Analyst
NOAA/NMFS
Environmental Research Division
Southwest Fisheries Science Center
***Note new street address***
110 McAllister Way
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Phone: (831)-420-3666
Fax: (831) 420-3980
e-mail: roy.mendelss...@noaa.gov www: https://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/
"Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill."
"From those who have been given much, much will be expected"
"the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr.
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
