tl;dr: Repackaging in native formats dramatically improves user access to
packages.
>> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:23:51 +0100, Uwe Ligges
>> said:
> 1. You probably mean "Depends" rather than "Requires".
> 2. You forgot "LinkingTo"
Heh, thanks! I'll add them.
> All binary packages on CRAN ar
A working system exists at
http://debian.cran.r-project.org
with automated builds (ie automated resolutions of both built-time and
run-time dependencies) of over 2000 packages for both 64-bit Linux ("amd64")
and 32-bit Linux ("i386") of the Debian 'testing' distribution. Charles and
I
On 20.01.2010 20:11, Allen S. Rout wrote:
Ross Boylan writes:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:48 +, Benilton Carvalho wrote:
How about using:
Enhances: Rmpi
This unique local bestiary of dependencies is quite inconvenient for
anyone trying to connect R with any other system of package
mana
Ross Boylan writes:
> On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:48 +, Benilton Carvalho wrote:
>> How about using:
>>
>> Enhances: Rmpi
This unique local bestiary of dependencies is quite inconvenient for
anyone trying to connect R with any other system of package
management. Below, I've included the rath
On 16 January 2010 at 10:53, Ross Boylan wrote:
| On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 07:49 -0800, Seth Falcon wrote:
| > Package authors
| > should be responsible enough to test their codes with and without
| > optional features.
| It seems unlikely most package authors will have access to a full range
| of pl
On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 07:49 -0800, Seth Falcon wrote:
> Package authors
> should be responsible enough to test their codes with and without
> optional features.
It seems unlikely most package authors will have access to a full range
of platform types.
Ross
_
On 1/15/10 7:47 AM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>
> On Jan 15, 2010, at 10:22 , Seth Falcon wrote:
>> I believe another option is:
>>
>> pkg <- "somePkg"
>> pkgAvail <- require(pkg, character.only = TRUE)
>> if (pkgAvail)
>> ...
>> else
>> ...
>>
>
> That is not an option - that is the
On 1/15/10 7:51 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
> the Windows checks for CRAN run with that setting, i.e.
>
> _R_CHECK_FORCE_SUGGESTS_=false
>
> Hence the multicore issue mentioned below actually does not exist.
I did not know that the Windows checks for CRAN used this setting.
My concern was initiated b
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 12:34 -0500, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>
> On Jan 15, 2010, at 12:18 , Ross Boylan wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 09:19 +0100, Kurt Hornik wrote:
> >> The idea is that maintainers typically want to
> >> fully check their functionality, suggesting to force suggests by
> >> def
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:48 +, Benilton Carvalho wrote:
> How about using:
>
> Enhances: Rmpi
>
> ?
>
> b
The main reason is that "enhances" seems a peculiar way to describe the
relation between a package that (optionally) uses a piece of
infrastructure and the infrastructure. Similarly, I
On Jan 15, 2010, at 12:18 , Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 09:19 +0100, Kurt Hornik wrote:
The idea is that maintainers typically want to
fully check their functionality, suggesting to force suggests by
default.
This might be the nub of the problem. There are different audiences,
e
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 09:19 +0100, Kurt Hornik wrote:
> The idea is that maintainers typically want to
> fully check their functionality, suggesting to force suggests by
> default.
This might be the nub of the problem. There are different audiences,
even for R CMD check.
The maintainer probably w
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010, Seth Falcon wrote:
There is a real need (of some kind) here. Not all packages work on all
platforms. For example, the multicore package provides a mechanism for
running parallel computations on a multi-cpu box, but it is not
available on Windows. A package that _is_ avai
On 15.01.2010 16:22, Seth Falcon wrote:
On 1/15/10 12:19 AM, Kurt Hornik wrote:
Jeff Ryan writes:
Hi Ross,
The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
trickery.
Take a look here (unless your name is
On Jan 15, 2010, at 10:22 , Seth Falcon wrote:
On 1/15/10 12:19 AM, Kurt Hornik wrote:
Jeff Ryan writes:
Hi Ross,
The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
trickery.
Take a look here (unless your n
On 1/15/10 12:19 AM, Kurt Hornik wrote:
>> Jeff Ryan writes:
>
>> Hi Ross,
>> The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
>> contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
>> trickery.
>
>> Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
I believe
How about using:
Enhances: Rmpi
?
b
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:00 AM, Ross Boylan wrote:
> I have a package that can use rmpi, but works fine without it. None of
> the automatic test code invokes rmpi functionality. (One test file
> illustrates how to use it, but has quit() as its first comma
> Jeff Ryan writes:
> Hi Ross,
> The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
> contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
> trickery.
> Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
But Kurt will we happy to tell you that you can turn off "fo
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 00:12 -0600, Jeff Ryan wrote:
> Hi Ross,
>
> The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
> contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
> trickery.
>
> Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
>
> http://r-forge.r-project
Hi Ross,
The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
trickery.
Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
http://r-forge.r-project.org/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/pkg/R/buildModel.methods.R?rev=367&roo
I have a package that can use rmpi, but works fine without it. None of
the automatic test code invokes rmpi functionality. (One test file
illustrates how to use it, but has quit() as its first command.)
What's the best way to handle this? In particular, what is the
appropriate form for upload t
21 matches
Mail list logo
