Yes, this is one consequence of the newly enforced check. Now you can
choose which version of the ff package you want to be compatible with.
In the GH version a manual file was renamed and this is now a breaking
change, so you cannot be compatible with both.
Gabor
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 11:47 AM Dr. Jens Oehlschlägel
<jens.oehlschlae...@truecluster.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Gabor and Duncan,
>
> > It's actually in ff/man/clone.rd, not clone.ff.rd. There is no
> > ff/man/clone.ff.rd file.
>
> but there *is* clone.ff.rd in the >= 4.0.0 versions of the packages
> bit/bit64/ff.
>
> Hence the check warning is a false alarm resulting from checking bit 4.0.2
> (GitHub.com/truecluster) against ff 2.2-14.2 (CRAN) instead of checking it
> against the also submitted ff 4.0.2 (GitHub.com/truecluster).
>
> So all I can and will do is waiting that CRAN maintainers install and check
> again.
>
> Best
>
> Jens
>
>
>
> >
> > Duncan Murdoch
> >
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > >
> > > Jens
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 16.06.20 22:31, Gábor Csárdi wrote:
> > >> This is how to look up the filename. The first "sp" is the topic name,
> > >> the second is the package name.
> > >>
> > >>> help("sp", "sp")[[1]]
> > >> [1] "C:/Users/csard/R/win-library/4.0/sp/help/00sp"
> > >>
> > >> So you need to link to the "00sp.Rd" file: \link[sp:00sp]{sp}
> > >>
> > >> Gabor
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:09 PM Wayne Oldford <rwoldf...@uwaterloo.ca>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi
> > >>>
> > >>> I got caught by this new test this week in trying to push an updated
> > >>> release of the loon package to CRAN.
> > >>>
> > >>> By following this thread, I corrected my cross-references to external
> > >>> packages but I got stymied by
> > >>> the one I hoped to give to the "sp" package for Spatial data
> > >>>
> > >>> _________
> > >>>
> > >>> Here is the history:
> > >>>
> > >>> I tried
> > >>> \link[sp:sp]{sp}
> > >>> which failed here:
> > >>> Debian:
> > >>> <https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/loon_1.3.1_20200616_162128/Debian/00check.log>
> > >>> Status: 1 WARNING
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> That was meant to correct an earlier attempt (it did for other links to
> > >>> "scales" for example) where I had tried
> > >>> \link[sp]{sp}
> > >>> and failed here:
> > >>> Debian:
> > >>> <https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/loon_1.3.1_20200615_213749/Debian/00check.log>
> > >>> Status: 1 WARNING
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> So to complete the possibilities as I understand them, I just now tried
> > >>> \link{sp}
> > >>> which, as might be expected, failed here:
> > >>> Debian:
> > >>> <https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/loon_1.3.1_20200616_213921/Debian/00check.log>
> > >>> Status: 1 WARNING
> > >>> As expected, error here was different: "Missing link" as opposed to
> > >>> "Non-file package-anchored link"
> > >>>
> > >>> _________
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I am not sure whether I have missed a subtlety in WRE or that the
> > >>> peculiar circumstance
> > >>> where the package, the topic, and the file name are all identical (sp)
> > >>> is some weird boundary case.
> > >>>
> > >>> Without further advice, I think I am just going to remove the link to
> > >>> "sp".
> > >>> It really is just a courtesy link to the package description for "sp".
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
> > >>>
> > >>> Wayne
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: R-package-devel <r-package-devel-boun...@r-project.org> on behalf
> > >>> of Georgi Boshnakov <georgi.boshna...@manchester.ac.uk>
> > >>> Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 at 9:27 AM
> > >>> To: Gábor Csárdi <csardi.ga...@gmail.com>, Duncan Murdoch
> > >>> <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com>
> > >>> Cc: List r-package-devel <r-package-devel@r-project.org>
> > >>> Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] check cross-references error: Non-file
> > >>> package-anchored link(s)
> > >>>
> > >>> I think that the current behaviour is documented in WRE:
> > >>>
> > >>> "...There are two other forms of optional argument specified as
> > >>> \link[pkg]{foo} and
> > >>> \link[pkg:bar]{foo} to link to the package pkg, to files foo.html
> > >>> and bar.html respectively.
> > >>> These are rarely needed, perhaps to refer to not-yet-installed
> > >>> packages (but there the HTML
> > >>> help system will resolve the link at run time) or in the normally
> > >>> undesirable event that more
> > >>> than one package offers help on a topic7 (in which case the
> > >>> present package has precedence so
> > >>> this is only needed to refer to other packages). They are
> > >>> currently only used in HTML help
> > >>> (and ignored for hyperlinks in LATEX conversions of help pages),
> > >>> and link to the file rather
> > >>> than the topic (since there is no way to know which topics are in
> > >>> which files in an uninstalled
> > >>> package) ... Because they have been frequently misused, the
> > >>> HTML help system looks for topic foo in package pkg
> > >>> if it does not find file foo.html."
> > >>>
> > >>> Unless I am missing something, it seems that it would be
> > >>> relatively painless to reverse the logic of the current behaviour of
> > >>> the help system,
> > >>> i.e. to start looking first for the topic and then for a file.
> > >>>
> > >>> Georgi Boshnakov
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: R-package-devel <r-package-devel-boun...@r-project.org> On
> > >>> Behalf Of Gábor Csárdi
> > >>> Sent: 16 June 2020 13:44
> > >>> To: Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com>
> > >>> Cc: List r-package-devel <r-package-devel@r-project.org>
> > >>> Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] check cross-references error: Non-file
> > >>> package-anchored link(s)
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:30 PM Duncan Murdoch
> > >>> <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On 15/06/2020 12:05 p.m., Martin Maechler wrote:
> > >>> > >>>>>> Duncan Murdoch on Sun, 14 Jun 2020 07:28:03 -0400
> > >>> writes:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > > I agree with almost everything you wrote, except one
> > >>> thing: this isn't
> > >>> > > > newly enforced, it has been enforced since the help
> > >>> system began. What
> > >>> > > > I think is new is that there are now tests for it.
> > >>> Previously those
> > >>> > > > links just wouldn't work.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > > Duncan Murdoch
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Yes, to all... including Duncan's agreement with Gábor.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Also, Duncan M earlier did mention that he had wanted to
> > >>> > > *change* the link-to-file behavior for these cases (when he
> > >>> wrote
> > >>> > > most of the Rd2html source code) but somehow did not get it.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Actually, I don't think I pushed for this change at the time
> > >>> (or at
> > >>> > least I didn't push much). I just wish now that I had, because
> > >>> I
> > >>> > think it will be harder to do it now than it would have been
> > >>> then.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Duncan
> > >>>
> > >>> I am not entirely sure, but maybe just documenting the current
> > >>> behaviour and undoing 78674 could work. With some tweaks? E.g.
> > >>>
> > >>> * updating R-exts to say that \link[pkg:topic]{text} will link to
> > >>> `topic.html` in `pkg` first (for historical reasons), and falls back to
> > >>> searching for `topic` in `pkg` at render time.
> > >>> * updating Rd2HTML to look for the topic and use it in the link,
> > >>> instead of throwing a warning, in it cannot find `topic.html`
> > >>> * removing the `R CMD check` warning for non-file links, that was
> > >>> added in 78674 :)
> > >>>
> > >>> Is there anything else?
> > >>>
> > >>> Gabor
> > >>>
> > >>> [...]
> > >>>
> > >>> ______________________________________________
> > >>> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
> > >>> ______________________________________________
> > >>> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ______________________________________________
> > >>> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
> > >>
> > >> ______________________________________________
> > >> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
> > >>
> > >
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
> > >
> >
> >
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
