On 1 February 2021 at 20:21, Jose Barrera wrote:
| Many thanks for your help Thierry but unfortunately I can't see the link
| between your first reply and my issue (of course, that's my fault).
Thierry very gently (yet correctly) suggested to have the "cached" results as
"precomputed" artifacts
On 01/02/2021 5:03 p.m., Ulrike Grömping wrote:
Dear package developeRs,
under the Fedora clang checks, I find the note
"Undeclared packages ‘FrF2’, ‘DoE.wrapper’, ‘sfsmisc’, ‘DoE.MIParray’,
‘planor’ in Rd xrefs"
for my package DoE.base. I understand that package planor has been
archived from
That will be hard to do without your package. Note that I've suggested a
work around in my first reply.
ir. Thierry Onkelinx
Statisticus / Statistician
Vlaamse Overheid / Government of Flanders
INSTITUUT VOOR NATUUR- EN BOSONDERZOEK / RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR NATURE AND
FOREST
Team Biometrie & Kwal
Dear package developeRs,
under the Fedora clang checks, I find the note
"Undeclared packages ‘FrF2’, ‘DoE.wrapper’, ‘sfsmisc’, ‘DoE.MIParray’,
‘planor’ in Rd xrefs"
for my package DoE.base. I understand that package planor has been
archived from CRAN; I don't understand what is wrong with th
Many thanks for your help Thierry but unfortunately I can't see the link
between your first reply and my issue (of course, that's my fault).
Jose Barrera
Statistician, Associate Lecturer
*IS**Global*
Barcelona Institute for Global Health - Campus MAR
Barcelona Biomedical Research Park (PRBB) (Ro
Indeed, the "cache" folder is not present in the tar.gz file. Could you
please help me on how to fix "the cache is not installed into the package"?
Thanks,
Jose Barrera
Statistician, Associate Lecturer
*IS**Global*
Barcelona Institute for Global Health - Campus MAR
Barcelona Biomedical Research
Probably because the cache is not installed into the package. I'd check the
tar.gz file to see if the cache is present.
ir. Thierry Onkelinx
Statisticus / Statistician
Vlaamse Overheid / Government of Flanders
INSTITUUT VOOR NATUUR- EN BOSONDERZOEK / RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR NATURE AND
FOREST
Team
Dear Thierry,
Thanks for your advice. However, I would like to understand why when I
build the vignette to get the pdf from the Rnw, it takes just 8 seconds
once the "cache" folder has been created instead of the initial 4 minutes,
but this time reduction does not happen when checking the package.
Dear Jose,
I store the results of CPU intensive chunks in the package. Have a look at
https://github.com/ropensci/git2rdata/blob/master/vignettes/efficiency.Rmd.
Best regards,
ir. Thierry Onkelinx
Statisticus / Statistician
Vlaamse Overheid / Government of Flanders
INSTITUUT VOOR NATUUR- EN BOS
Dear all,
I have an issue when checking a package that includes a vignette using
cache = TRUE in some chunks. The vignette is generated with knit from an
Rnw document. The issue is that cache works when building the vignette
locally but it seems not working when checking the package.
I have proce
On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 6:52 PM Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>
> On 31/01/2021 12:35 p.m., Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> > On 31/01/2021 10:57 a.m., Gábor Csárdi wrote:
> >> Do you actually experience any problems, if you don't treat this case
> >> specially?
> >
> > Yes, what was happening was that remotes::
11 matches
Mail list logo
