Dear Rolf, (Moving this one to R-devel...)
On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 21:01:13 +0000 Rolf Turner <rolftur...@posteo.net> wrote: > I *really* think that the instructions from CRAN could have been > clearer! Without your guidance I'd have been at a total loss. Since the CRAN e-mails quote the R CMD check messages verbatim, would it have been enough if R CMD check suggested using --compact-vignettes? Index: src/library/tools/R/check.R =================================================================== --- src/library/tools/R/check.R (revision 85249) +++ src/library/tools/R/check.R (working copy) @@ -3079,7 +3079,8 @@ " 'qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), "\n", - " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files\n") + " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files,\n", + " or build the source package with --compact-vignettes\n") } if (R_check_doc_sizes2) { gs_cmd <- find_gs_cmd() @@ -3093,7 +3094,8 @@ " 'gs+qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), "\n", - ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files\n') + ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files,\n', + ' or build the source package with --compact-vignettes=both\n') } } else { if (!any) noteLog(Log) Or is there anything else you would prefer to be reworded? Should the message link to Writing R Extensions, section 1.4? Recently there was a project to improve the R CMD check messages [*], but I managed to miss almost all of it. -- Best regards, Ivan [*] https://github.com/r-devel/r-project-sprint-2023/issues/55 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel