Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

On 17.03.2025 14:48, Ivan Krylov via R-package-devel wrote: В Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:38:50 + (UTC) Mark Webster пишет: Flavor: r-devel-windows-x86_64 Check: Overall checktime, Result: NOTE    Overall checktime 12 min > 10 min I think you'll have to reduce the test datasets further: https

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

Dear Mark That note is entirely expected. I believe it is just to help the CRAN maintainers. Michael On 16/03/2025 22:06, Mark Webster via R-package-devel wrote: Hello, I'm getting a NOTE on winbuilder, which doesn't come with much information: Build log:> * using log directory 'd:/RCompile/

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

On 17.03.2025 14:18, Lists wrote: Dear Mark That note is entirely expected. I believe it is just to help the CRAN maintainers. Michael On 16/03/2025 22:06, Mark Webster via R-package-devel wrote: Hello, I'm getting a NOTE on winbuilder, which doesn't come with much information: Build log

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

> I think you'll have to reduce the test datasets further:>  > https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/autodb_2.3.0_20250316_203825/Windows/examples_and_tests/tests/testthat.Rout Oh, definitely.I'll reduce them further and re-submit, thanks.Best Regards,Mark [[alternative H

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

>> I think you'll have to reduce the test datasets further:>> >> https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/autodb_2.3.0_20250316_203825/Windows/examples_and_tests/tests/testthat.Rout >> > > Right, manly from > > > * checking tests ... [10m] OK >    Running 'testthat.R' [10m] > > Please

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

В Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:38:50 + (UTC) Mark Webster пишет: > > Flavor: r-devel-windows-x86_64 > > Check: Overall checktime, Result: NOTE > >   Overall checktime 12 min > 10 min I think you'll have to reduce the test datasets further: https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/autodb_2.3

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

Hi Michael and Ivan, > Could you please share a link to the check results? If it's> , > it seems to have passed the R CMD check. As Michael says, the NOTE > about the package being a new submission is expected.

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about authors, no explanation

В Sun, 16 Mar 2025 22:06:16 + (UTC) Mark Webster via R-package-devel пишет: > I'm getting a NOTE on winbuilder, which doesn't come with much > information: > Build log: > * using log directory > 'd:/RCompile/CRANguest/R-devel/autodb.Rcheck' > > * using R version 4.5.0 alpha (2025-03-15 r87978

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about lack of prebuilt manual

Thank you to, in alphabetical order of given names, Iris, Ivan, Uwe and Wolfgang for your responses. I implemented Iris' suggestion and have successfully uploaded one of the packages to CRAN. Michael On 09/07/2024 10:06, Ivan Krylov wrote: В Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:54:22 + "Viechtbauer, Wolfga

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about lack of prebuilt manual

В Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:54:22 + "Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (NP)" пишет: > This appears to be related to this change > (https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-devel/NEWS.html): > > - tools::checkRd() (used by R CMD check) detects more problems with > ⁠\Sexpr⁠-based dynamic content, including bad n

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about lack of prebuilt manual

twenty vectorized hail Rs, and hope for the best. Best, Wolfgang > -Original Message- > From: R-package-devel On Behalf Of Uwe > Ligges > Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 16:40 > To: Iris Simmons ; Michael Dewey > Cc: List r-package-devel > Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE a

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about lack of prebuilt manual

On 08.07.2024 16:08, Iris Simmons wrote: This is something I'd run into recently as well. The R devs changed the default from building the manual to not building the manual. Now if you want (or need) to build the manual, you should add Well, not really, we still build manuals unless file(s)

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about lack of prebuilt manual

This is something I'd run into recently as well. The R devs changed the default from building the manual to not building the manual. Now if you want (or need) to build the manual, you should add BuildManual: TRUE to your DESCRIPTION. On Mon, Jul 8, 2024, 10:05 Michael Dewey wrote: > Short ver

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE: Examples with CPU time > 2.5 times elapsed time

From: Ivan Krylov Sent: Monday, December 4, 2023 22:42 To: Artur Araujo Cc: r-package-devel@r-project.org ; Javier Roca Pardi�as ; Lu�s Machado Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE: Examples with CPU time > 2.5 times elapsed time Dear Artur, You've got a well-written

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE: Examples with CPU time > 2.5 times elapsed time

Wow. On Mon, Dec 4, 2023, 5:43 PM Ivan Krylov wrote: > Dear Artur, > > You've got a well-written package. There are some parts I wasn't able > to understand (e.g. changing the class of a variable by reference using > SET_CLASS and later changing it back), but there are no obvious places > where

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE: Examples with CPU time > 2.5 times elapsed time

Dear Artur, You've got a well-written package. There are some parts I wasn't able to understand (e.g. changing the class of a variable by reference using SET_CLASS and later changing it back), but there are no obvious places where a mistake could be hiding. On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 23:43:32 + Artur

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE: Examples with CPU time > 2.5 times elapsed time

In these cases, I unfortunately find the best approach to be to wrap the examples in `if (interactive()) ` to ensure that they will not be ran on CRAN tests machines. It hampers the checks of CRAN but it makes it possible to get usable code to users. On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 9:54 AM Artur Araujo wr

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE or Information?

I need to do an rlang release for the same format warning! I'll take this opportunity to look into conditionally exporting `%||%` from base, which should solve that warning. Best, Lionel On 11/28/23, Göran Broström wrote: > A thirty-year-old format error in the C code of my package eha was > fi

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE or Information?

В Tue, 28 Nov 2023 13:40:51 +0100 Göran Broström пишет: > I guess that this is a result of my use of devtools and roxygen for > writing documentation. Is this a bug in rlang and the mask part of > the message will go away when it is fixed? Not exactly a bug. It just so happens that rlang export

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE or Information?

On Tue, 28 Nov 2023, Göran Broström writes: > A thirty-year-old format error in the C code of my > package eha was finally detected by the latest R-devel, > thanks to CRAN for that! > > However, I also get a message never seen before, when I check the package: > > -

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note to repository maintainers about ABI change in Matrix 1.6-2

On 2023-11-10 5:04 pm, Mikael Jagan wrote: For repositories != CRAN: Matrix 1.6-2 was released on Nov 8. Due to an ABI change, repositories maintaining R package binaries should ensure that binaries for the first order reverse LinkingTo of Matrix are rebuilt under Matrix 1.6-2: > db <- a

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: no function found corresponding to methods exports for show

On 2023-10-08 5:43 pm, Mikael Jagan wrote: Hi, I recently submitted my first R package to CRAN, and I encountered a NOTE during the checking process. The NOTE looks like this: = Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc, r-devel-windo

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: no function found corresponding to methods exports for show

Hi, I recently submitted my first R package to CRAN, and I encountered a NOTE during the checking process. The NOTE looks like this: = Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc, r-devel-windows-x86_64 Check: whether the namespace can be l

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about missing package ‘emmeans’ on macos-x86_64

Hi Simon, THX for the clarification and additional work I have caused. Helmut Simon Urbanek wrote on 2023-06-24 06:51: On Jun 24, 2023, at 12:19 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote: On 23.06.2023 11:27, Helmut Schütz wrote: Dear all, since a while (January?) we face NOTEs in package checks (https://

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about missing package ‘emmeans’ on macos-x86_64

> On Jun 24, 2023, at 12:19 AM, Uwe Ligges > wrote: > > > > On 23.06.2023 11:27, Helmut Schütz wrote: >> Dear all, >> since a while (January?) we face NOTEs in package checks >> (https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_PowerTOST.html): >> Version: 1.5-4 >> Check: package depend

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about missing package ‘emmeans’ on macos-x86_64

On 23.06.2023 11:27, Helmut Schütz wrote: Dear all, since a while (January?) we face NOTEs in package checks (https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_PowerTOST.html): Version: 1.5-4 Check: package dependencies Result: NOTE     Package suggested but not available for checking: ‘

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about use of `:::`

I think I will go with the suggestion of creating a new empty environment, adding only the argument parsing function. Moreover I will use the same name as the user-facing function that's being invoked, i.e., foo <- function(...) { call <- match.call(expand.dots = TRUE) call[[1]] <- quote(pa

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about use of `:::`

If you want the name of the function to appear, then you can put the function in an environment whose parent is where most of the evaluation should take place. For example, f <- function(...) { call <- match.call(expand.dots = TRUE) call[[1]] <- quote(parse_args) envir <- new.env(parent

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about use of `:::`

Here's another suggestion, not sure if it's any good, but you could structure your functions like parse_args <- function (envir = parent.frame()) { evalq(list(a = a, b = b, ..., y = y, z = z), envir) <...> } exported_fun <- function (a, b, ..., y, z) { parse_args() <...> } It's s

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about use of `:::`

You could add an 'envir' argument to parse_args() and do your eval(..., envir=envir) stuff inside parse_args(). Then change call[[1]] <- quote(pense:::parse_args) args <- eval.parent(call) to call[[1]] <- quote(parse_args) call$envir <- parent.frame() args <- eval(call) [That code is

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about use of `:::`

Thank you both for the suggestions. I would prefer a clean stack trace in case of errors as input errors are caught by this function and hence users might very well see errors emitted from it. It seems more informative to me if the error message would say "Error in .parse_args…" than "Error in new.

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about use of `:::`

David, why not call[[1]] <- parse_args The assignment is evaluated in your namespace so that makes sure the call is that of your function. The only downside I see is that in a stack trace you'll see the definition instead of the name. Or possibly do.call(parse_args, as.list(call[-1])) Cheers

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on submission Found the following files/directories: 'NUL'

FWIW: optimx::optimx is outdated and only there for legacy use. Better to use the optimx::optimr() function for single solvers. JN On 2022-11-25 05:10, Ivan Krylov wrote: В Fri, 25 Nov 2022 09:59:10 + "ROTOLO, Federico /FR" пишет: When submitting my package parfm, I get the following no

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on submission Found the following files/directories: 'NUL'

В Fri, 25 Nov 2022 13:10:39 +0300 Ivan Krylov пишет: > It also breaks the non-default sink, if any was set up by the user. That's not correct, I'm sorry. sink() maintains a stack of diversions and will automatically restore the user-chosen sink(), if any was set up, when you call sink(NULL). --

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on submission Found the following files/directories: 'NUL'

В Fri, 25 Nov 2022 09:59:10 + "ROTOLO, Federico /FR" пишет: > When submitting my package parfm, I get the following note > Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc > Check: for non-standard things in the check directory, Result: NOTE > Found the following files/directories: > 'NUL' > so

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE checking for detritus in the temp directory on windows

@comeetie Chargé de Recherche Université Gustave Eiffel GRETTIA/COSYS Tel : 01 81 66 87 18 Web : http://www.comeetie.fr - Mail original - De: "Henrik Bengtsson" À: "etienne come" Cc: "r-package-devel" Envoyé: Vendredi 30 Septembre 2022 17:19:03 Objet: Re:

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE checking for detritus in the temp directory on windows

Hi. > * checking for detritus in the temp directory ... NOTE > Found the following files/directories: > 'Rscript306c1f1adf1' 'Rscript3fb41f1adf1' Whenever seeing detritus files with name Rscript like these, it's a strong suggestion that parallel workers on MS Windows are involved. More precisely

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE related to Miniconda installation

-package-devel@r-project.org Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE related to Miniconda installation Attention: This email originated outside of Penn State Health. Use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. Hey, First of all I see that you need a numpy package so I assume some matrix/tensor

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE related to Miniconda installation

Hey, First of all I see that you need a numpy package so I assume some matrix/tensor operations are done. There is no difference in performance between R and Python if you are using proper BLAS and LAPACK. Windows users might use MRO MKL, Linux users openblas and the Mac os vecLib has to be activ

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE related to Miniconda installation

I can't really see why it should be "recommended" to handle installing system requirements inside an R package. There are many ways to satisfy such requirements that would not involve miniconda. If you were determined to provide such support, doing so in a normal function documented in a vignett

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE related to Miniconda installation

On 17/09/2021 2:55 p.m., Walter, Vonn wrote: Hi Everyone, I am developing a package (called mypackage in the text below) that uses reticulate to call a Python script for computational efficiency. At some point during the development of the package I read that it would be good to verify insta

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: significantly better compression could be obtained ...

On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 12:09:51 +0100 Sebastian Meyer wrote: > Am 04.03.21 um 10:24 schrieb Rolf Turner: > > But this still leaves the question: Why the is > > R CMD check telling me to use the flag --resave-data, when I *just > > did that*??? > > Yes, indeed! I've investigated further and fo

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: significantly better compression could be obtained ...

Am 04.03.21 um 10:24 schrieb Rolf Turner: > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 08:44:31 +0100 > Sebastian Meyer wrote: > >> Am 04.03.21 um 01:41 schrieb Rolf Turner: >>> >>> ... by using R CMD build --resave-data >>> >>> But I *did* use that flag with my build command!!! And yet "R CMD >>> check" seems to th

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: significantly better compression could be obtained ...

On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 08:44:31 +0100 Sebastian Meyer wrote: > Am 04.03.21 um 01:41 schrieb Rolf Turner: > > > > ... by using R CMD build --resave-data > > > > But I *did* use that flag with my build command!!! And yet "R CMD > > check" seems to think that I didn't! > > Just to be sure: Are you

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: significantly better compression could be obtained ...

Am 04.03.21 um 01:41 schrieb Rolf Turner: > > ... by using R CMD build --resave-data > > But I *did* use that flag with my build command!!! And yet "R CMD > check" seems to think that I didn't! Just to be sure: Are you running R CMD check on that freshly built tarball or is devtools::check() in

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: checking CRAN incoming feasibility but the package did not pass

Thank you very much. I solved the issue with precomputed results. Best, *-* *Aristide Elysée HOUNDETOUNGAN* *Ph.D. Candidate in Economics at Université Laval* *Personal website : *www.ahoundetoungan.com On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 at 19:33, Uwe Ligges wrote: >

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: checking CRAN incoming feasibility but the package did not pass

You should be reporting everything, the key issue here was Check: Overall checktime, Result: NOTE Overall checktime 23 min > 10 min which is mainly from the vignette. Please reduce its check time by using - few iterations - toy data - and if that is not quick enough, try to provide precompute

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: checking CRAN incoming feasibility but the package did not pass

To the best of my knowledge, new submissions always get that note, and new submissions are handled differently, as they are given closer inspection by a human, and since this is all-volunteer the amount of time that can take for the code review can vary greatly. If you are greatly concerned t

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: checking CRAN incoming feasibility but the package did not pass

That's weird, I agree that there don't seem to be any issues here for you to deal with. I would write back to CRAN (at whatever e-mail address is suggested for correspondence, c...@r-project.org if you can't figure it out) and ask for clarification (presumably the e-mail didn't list any oth

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

On 8/7/20 8:35 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: On 07/08/2020 6:53 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote: Hi Duncan, Duncan Murdoch wrote on 2020-08-07 21:55: On 07/08/2020 3:22 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote: I see. However, the HTML-source states This manual is for R, version 4.1.0 Under development (2020-08-06)

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

On 07/08/2020 6:53 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote: Hi Duncan, Duncan Murdoch wrote on 2020-08-07 21:55: On 07/08/2020 3:22 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote: I see. However, the HTML-source states This manual is for R, version 4.1.0 Under development (2020-08-06). I was relying on the PDF-version (4.0.2 o

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

Hi Duncan, Duncan Murdoch wrote on 2020-08-07 21:55: On 07/08/2020 3:22 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote: I see. However, the HTML-source states This manual is for R, version 4.1.0 Under development (2020-08-06). I was relying on the PDF-version (4.0.2 of 2020-06-22) which does *not* contain this sen

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

On 07/08/2020 3:22 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote: Hi Duncan, Duncan Murdoch wrote on 2020-08-07 18:39: You're reading the wrong version of the manual.  This is in the R-devel manual: "Packages referred to by these ‘other forms’ should be declared in the DESCRIPTION file, in the ‘Depends’, ‘Imports

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

Hi Duncan, Duncan Murdoch wrote on 2020-08-07 18:39: You're reading the wrong version of the manual.  This is in the R-devel manual: "Packages referred to by these ‘other forms’ should be declared in the DESCRIPTION file, in the ‘Depends’, ‘Imports’, ‘Suggests’ or ‘Enhances’ fields. " This

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

On 07/08/2020 11:02 a.m., Brian G. Peterson wrote: On Fri, 2020-08-07 at 15:46 +0100, Gábor Csárdi wrote: If you want to link to a package in the documentation, you'll have to add it to Suggests. This doesn't make any sense. If you don't use the code from that package anywhere, then a cross-

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

The whole point of the Suggests package relationship is that you don't actually have to have it installed to use the package. It does have to be installed to check the package, which allows the link to be tested at least once before being released. On August 7, 2020 8:02:47 AM PDT, "Brian G. Pe

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:51 PM Helmut Schütz wrote: > > Hi Gábor, > > Gábor Csárdi wrote on 2020-08-07 16:46: > > If you want to link to a package in the documentation, you'll have to > > add it to Suggests. > > THX, will do. Is this documented somewhere? The check is documented in https://cran.r

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

Hi Gábor, THX again. Case closed. Helmut Gábor Csárdi wrote on 2020-08-07 17:02: On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:51 PM Helmut Schütz wrote: Hi Gábor, Gábor Csárdi wrote on 2020-08-07 16:46: If you want to link to a package in the documentation, you'll have to add it to Suggests. THX, will do. Is

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

On Fri, 2020-08-07 at 15:46 +0100, Gábor Csárdi wrote: > If you want to link to a package in the documentation, you'll have to > add it to Suggests. This doesn't make any sense. If you don't use the code from that package anywhere, then a cross-reference to that package should not require the e

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

Hi Brian, you take the words out of my mouth. However, we were slapped in the face... Helmut Brian G. Peterson wrote on 2020-08-07 17:02: On Fri, 2020-08-07 at 15:46 +0100, Gábor Csárdi wrote: If you want to link to a package in the documentation, you'll have to add it to Suggests. This does

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

Hi Gábor, Gábor Csárdi wrote on 2020-08-07 16:46: If you want to link to a package in the documentation, you'll have to add it to Suggests. THX, will do. Is this documented somewhere? Any why don't the *other* installations of CRAN complain as well? Helmut -- Ing. Helmut Schütz BEBAC – Con

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE in r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang

If you want to link to a package in the documentation, you'll have to add it to Suggests. Gabor On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:45 PM Helmut Schütz wrote: > > Dear all, > > I'm struggling to understand this NOTE in > r-devel-linux-x86_64-fedora-clang (only) > https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: information on .o files is not available / Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C)

Many thanks to everybody for the valuable answers. Several people (Benjamin and Ivan) pointed to the lack of portability due to the "-Wno-cast-function-type" flag. I have changed this. Further, as suggested by Benjamin, I also added the " -DNDEBUG" flag. Consequently, there is no assert call anym

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: information on .o files is not available / Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C)

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 11:25:40 +0200 Fabio Sigrist wrote: > Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C) > Found 'abort', possibly from 'abort' (C), 'runtime' (Fortran) > Found 'exit', possibly from 'exit' (C), 'stop' (Fortran) > Found 'printf', possibly from 'printf' (C) A curious thi

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: information on .o files is not available / Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C)

On 17 July 2020 at 14:58, Benjamin Christoffersen wrote: | Quick guess. After changing | > SET(CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS "${CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS} -std=c++11 -pthread -O3 -Wextra -Wall -Wno-unknown-pragmas -Wno-return-type -Wno-ignored-attributes -Wno-cast-function-type -Wno-error=cast-function-type") | | to

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: information on .o files is not available / Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C)

Quick guess. After changing > SET(CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS "${CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS} -std=c++11 -pthread -O3 -Wextra -Wall > -Wno-unknown-pragmas -Wno-return-type -Wno-ignored-attributes > -Wno-cast-function-type -Wno-error=cast-function-type") to > SET(CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS "${CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS} -std=c++11 -pthread -

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: information on .o files is not available / Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C)

On 17 July 2020 at 11:25, Fabio Sigrist wrote: | I am trying to get an R package with C++ code on CRAN and I have one NOTE | remaining, for which I can't find a solution: | | Note: information on .o files for x64 is not available | File | 'd:/RCompile/CRANincoming/R-devel/lib/gpboost/libs/x64/

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: information on .o files is not available / Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C)

  Can you run the checks only on the subdirectory containing the compiled code?  If yes, then you can run it only on half of that directory and identify it with a binary search.   Some years ago, I found a particularly difficult bug that way.  If I recall correctly, I made a copy of t

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note: information on .o files is not available / Found '_exit', possibly from '_exit' (C)

So maybe you tried that already but I noticed that sometimes when I do the check on the package directory rather than on the tarball I get similar errors. I don't know if that's the problem but it should be a quick thing to try. On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:05 AM Fabio Sigrist wrote: > Dear all, >

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE from checking for detritus in the temp directory

Dear Gábor, Thanks so much for your suggestions. Now my problems are solved. Best wishes, CP On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 9:52 AM Gábor Csárdi wrote: > URLs are fine, the problem is with opening external programs like a > web browser or a PDF viewer. I think you do that here: > > > https://github.c

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE from checking for detritus in the temp directory

URLs are fine, the problem is with opening external programs like a web browser or a PDF viewer. I think you do that here: https://github.com/AppliedStat/R/blob/8e4173da8917caf0f4f68d4056902075fb9013c2/rQCC/man/factors.cc.Rd#L118 https://github.com/AppliedStat/R/blob/8e4173da8917caf0f4f68d40569020

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE from checking for detritus in the temp directory

Thanks Gábor, I removed all the URLs in the *.Rd files and resubmitted to CRAN. I got the same NOTE again as below: After removing the URLs in the *.Rd : https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/rQCC_1.20.7_20200704_161730/Debian/00check.log Just in case, the below is the NOTE before

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE from checking for detritus in the temp directory

Most likely this is because you start a web browser in your examples or tests. Try to find where that happens, and don't run it that example or test case on CRAN. Gabor On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 1:46 PM Applied Statistics Laboratory wrote: > > Dear All, > > I got a NOTE from CRAN: > > > > > > > > *

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note about dependency on archived package

The note is there to remind CRAN that the package previously had problems serious enough to warrant archival. Since you have solved the problem, you do not need to do anything else in your submission. On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 at 7:23 am, Gianmarco Alberti < gianmarcoalbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello,

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note about dependency on archived package

I had a similar problem and today it was solved. What I did was first, solve any possible dependency issue of the archived package, check your package against r-devel, using --as-cran, and then write to CRAN saying that your package is currently archived because of ., but you are submitting a

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note about mispelled words

Interesting. 'Kruskal Wallis' gets 5.68M google hits, 'Kruskall Wallis' gets 432K ... Within CRAN packages, sos::findFn("kruskal") gets 408 hits, =sos::findFn("kruskall") gets 15 hits. (Some of those may be like the use of 'euclidian' in stats::dist() to intentionally match misspellings ...

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note about dependency on archived package

Further to my earlier email, I understand that my package has been archived since my last version on CRAN (1.1.0) had among its dependencies a package that has been archived. Now my question: How can I bring my package (actually the new version 1.1.1 that I’m trying to check) back to life (i.e.

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note about mispelled words

However, notice that if it is the guy from the Kruskal-Wallis test (William K., 1919--2005), the "Kruskall" is in fact misspelt. It might be someone else, of course... -pd > On 17 Mar 2020, at 18:24 , Duncan Murdoch wrote: > > I believe it is also acceptable to explain in your submission mess

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note about mispelled words

I believe it is also acceptable to explain in your submission message that the misspelled words are all proper names. As far as I know, misspellings are not enough of a problem to cause an automatic rejection, so a human being will be making a judgment about the note. Duncan Murdoch On 17/03

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note about mispelled words

You can single quote them to avoid them being spell checked, e.g. ... using methods of 'Kruskall' and 'Brainerd'. This is a common and accepted practice. This is hinted at in "Writing R Extensions" (e.g. help.start()); The mandatory ‘Description’ field should give a comprehensive description of

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note about "marked UTF-8 strings" when checking with R-devel

Excellent! Thanks for the quick response and best wishes, Dominic On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 15:17, Uwe Ligges wrote: > > > On 27.01.2020 17:22, Dominic Comtois wrote: > > Checking my summarytools package before submitting an updated version to > > CRAN, I get this note when using rhub::check_wit

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note about "marked UTF-8 strings" when checking with R-devel

On 27.01.2020 17:22, Dominic Comtois wrote: Checking my summarytools package before submitting an updated version to CRAN, I get this note when using rhub::check_with_rdevel() : checking contents of ‘data’ directory (1.4s) checking data for non-ASCII characters (1.6s) *Note: found 7

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on winbuilder-develop

On 24/07/2019 6:54 a.m., Martin Maechler wrote: Duncan Murdoch on Wed, 24 Jul 2019 06:12:35 -0400 writes: > On 24/07/2019 3:08 a.m., Martin Maechler wrote: >>> Roy Mendelssohn >>> on Tue, 23 Jul 2019 18:44:24 -0700 writes: >> >> > Thanks, I was looking at t

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on winbuilder-develop

> Duncan Murdoch > on Wed, 24 Jul 2019 06:12:35 -0400 writes: > On 24/07/2019 3:08 a.m., Martin Maechler wrote: >>> Roy Mendelssohn >>> on Tue, 23 Jul 2019 18:44:24 -0700 writes: >> >> > Thanks, I was looking at the raw files, not the .Rd files. >> > T

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on winbuilder-develop

On 24/07/2019 3:08 a.m., Martin Maechler wrote: Roy Mendelssohn on Tue, 23 Jul 2019 18:44:24 -0700 writes: > Thanks, I was looking at the raw files, not the .Rd files. > There are \keyword arguments in those file, will have to > search to see why they are getting generated.

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on winbuilder-develop

> Roy Mendelssohn > on Tue, 23 Jul 2019 18:44:24 -0700 writes: > Thanks, I was looking at the raw files, not the .Rd files. > There are \keyword arguments in those file, will have to > search to see why they are getting generated. -Roy just to rub the obvious into everyb

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on winbuilder-develop

Thanks, I was looking at the raw files, not the .Rd files. There are \keyword arguments in those file, will have to search to see why they are getting generated. -Roy > On Jul 23, 2019, at 6:02 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > > On 23/07/2019 8:26 p.m., Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-pa

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on winbuilder-develop

On 23/07/2019 8:26 p.m., Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal via R-package-devel wrote: Hi All: I am in the process of testing in order to submit a new version of a package to CRAN, and I am getting clean results on everything but winbuilder_develop. There I am getting 1 Note: Found the followi

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note

Regarding the global variables... I found [1] illuminating, in particular the comments on the solution. [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41954302/where-to-create-package-environment-variables On June 4, 2019 11:07:20 AM PDT, Duncan Murdoch wrote: >On 04/06/2019 8:36 a.m., Bernd JAGLA

Re: [R-pkg-devel] note

On 04/06/2019 8:36 a.m., Bernd JAGLA wrote: Hi, I am trying to submit a package with a shiny app to cran. I get 2 notes that I don't know how to resolve. I would appreciate very much any suggestions/help. Thanks a lot. It seems the first note is on possibly misspelled words. I am using c

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on check of DOI: string

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Uwe Ligges wrote: On 02.04.2019 18:35, Roger Bivand wrote: Using https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/submission_checklist.html, I have a real but non-conformant DOI string in my DESCRIPTION file: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990830)18:16<2147::AID-SIM

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note on check of DOI: string

On 02.04.2019 18:35, Roger Bivand wrote: Using https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/submission_checklist.html, I have a real but non-conformant DOI string in my DESCRIPTION file: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990830)18:16<2147::AID-SIM179>3.0.CO;2-I giving in check --as-cr

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE for a suggested package

On 24.02.2019 00:43, Mohammad Ali Nilforooshan wrote: I'm struggling to stop receiving a NOTE about a suggested package, and it seems to be the problem for many people. Your help is really appreciated. In the function, I have: if(requireNamespace("doParallel", quietly=TRUE)) { library("d

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE for a suggested package

Remove the library function call... On February 23, 2019 3:43:15 PM PST, Mohammad Ali Nilforooshan wrote: >I'm struggling to stop receiving a NOTE about a suggested package, and >it >seems to be the problem for many people. Your help is really >appreciated. > >In the function, I have: > >if(requ

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE for a suggested package

You can remove the `library("doParallel")`. Your call to requireNamespace() plus calling all doParallel functions with `::` is sufficient. That should resolve the NOTE. On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 5:49 PM Mohammad Ali Nilforooshan wrote: > > I'm struggling to stop receiving a NOTE about a suggested

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE regarding dependencies in R code: Missing or unexported object

--- Begin Message --- My fault, just noticed I had downloaded the wrong version of lmerTest from github (lmerTest instead of lmerTestR). Fixed now. Thank you Regards, David En sábado, 21 de abril de 2018 16:27:45 CEST, Rune Haubo escribió: I don't think 'summary' is actually exported

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE regarding dependencies in R code: Missing or unexported object

On 20/04/2018 3:53 PM, David Hervás via R-package-devel wrote: Hi, I have sent my package "clickR" to CRAN and was asked to fix the following NOTE: * checking dependencies in R code ... NOTE Missing or unexported object: 'lmerTest::summary' I'm not sure what's going on, here is the Imports sectio

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE regarding dependencies in R code: Missing or unexported object

I don't think 'summary' is actually exported by lmerTest (version >= 3.0-0): library(lmerTest) fm <- lmer(Informed.liking ~ Gender + Information * Product + (1 | Consumer) + (1 | Consumer:Product), data=ham) lmerTest::summary(fm) # gives: Error: 'summary' is not an exported object fr

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note about portable file names

Konstantin, RcppMsgPack 0.1.1, containing MsgPack headers from msgpack-c 1.4.2, is now on CRAN. It should work for your purposes with a simple LinkingTo: RcppMsgPack. I turned of Windows builds; there is a weird interaction that may just be one of these include header order things but I haven't

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Note about portable file names

On 11 June 2017 at 16:46, Konstantin Sorokin wrote: | On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | | On 11 June 2017 at 15:18, Konstantin Sorokin wrote: | | Hello! | | | | When checking one of my packages I have following message: | | | | checking for

  1   2   >