Hi, On 09-07-2023 21:09, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| I don't understand this then. For several packages we're seeing failures | in testing even if we only use r-base from unstable and everything else | from testing to run the test. They pass with a rebuild r-cran-fnn and/or | a rebuild and updated r-cran-ps, and/or r-cran-tibble. (Sorry, in my | previous message I think I added r-cran-dplyr by mistake, misremembered).It would be useful to break this down into concrete reproducible examples.
Several in the set that I explicitly tested: r-cran-stars (needs r-cran-tibble and r-cran-interval) r-cran-spacetime (needs r-cran-interval) r-cran-uwot (needs r-cran-fnn) r-cran-xopen (needs r-cran-ps)
So this is where R 4.3.[01] will possibly break with some older packages. But the fix is simple because when R 4.3.0 came out all packages at CRAN complied. We need to have current packages that correspond to the R 4.3.0 standard.
And Andreas already ensured (nearly) everything is rebuild by now, so that part is done. To be clear, I think I understand it when you say this is not caused by r-base, but rather by those packages that need rebuilding with the new r-base. However, to ensure those packages are upgraded alongside r-base, r-base needs to force that. And that's why there is the Breaks.
I think the list is now: r-cran-cairo (<= 1.6-0-1) r-cran-fnn (<= 1.1.3.1-1) r-cran-magick (<= 2.7.3+dfsg-3) r-cran-ps (<= 1.7.2-1) r-cran-ragg (<= 1.2.5-1) r-cran-svglite (<= 2.1.1-1) r-cran-tibble (<= 3.1.8+dfsg-1) r-cran-tikzdevice (<= 0.12.4-1) r-cran-vdiffr (<= 1.0.5-1)
they built with. My point is that the accept-vs-break comes from the package, not from R.)
Sure, but the package in testing and stable can't (easily) tell that anymore in their relationships as they are already shipped, so packages moving into testing should solve it. I think only r-base is in the position to add the right Breaks.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
