R Under development (unstable) (2020-06-07 r78653)
Platform: x86_64-w64-mingw32/x64 (64-bit)
Running under: Windows 10 x64 (build 18362)
It's R 4.0.1 using Jeroen rtools40 scripts on Win 10 64bit.
1513 OK, not sure why sessionInfo() went nuts though per below. Restarting
R worked to provide the session info above.
[1] "All ok, 1513 results"
Warning message:
In dir.create("templib") : 'templib' already exists
> sessionInfo()
Error: $ operator is invalid for atomic vectors
In addition: Warning messages:
1: In FUN(X[[i]], ...) :
DESCRIPTION file of package 'foo' is missing or broken
2: In FUN(X[[i]], ...) :
DESCRIPTION file of package 'fooModule' is missing or broken
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 1:47 PM Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Below is an ascii version of what I blogged yesterday, proper URL links are
> at http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com/blog/2020/06/15#rcpp_1.0.5_testing
>
> Help in testing, particular on unusual hardware or compiler choices, or
> particularly old releases of OS, compiler, R, ... would be welcome. I am
> quite confident the release will be fine on CRAN and standard systems.
>
> But for use on less standard setups, the time to test is now. If you are a
> user of Rcpp under such circumstance, please help now in testing and
> reporting issues, if any are seen.
>
> Thanks, Dirk
>
>
> Mon, 15 Jun 2020
>
> Rcpp 1.0.5 in two+ weeks: Please help test
>
> rcpp logo
>
> With the current four-month release cycle, the next Rcpp release is due
> in
> July following the 1.0.4 release in March. Just prior to the 1.0.4
> release
> I had asked this:
>
> It would be particularly beneficial if those with “unsual” build
> dependencies tested it as we would increase overall coverage beyond
> what
> I get from testing against 1800+ CRAN packages. BioConductor would
> also
> be welcome.
>
> but only on the rcpp-devel list, and only about a good week prior to the
> release.
>
> I remain rather disappointed and disillusioned about what happened after
> 1.0.4 was released. Two PRs in that release were soon seen to have side
> effects on more ‘marginal’ test systems, precisely what added testing
> could have revealed. An additional issue arose from changes in R’s make
> system, which is harder to anticipate or test. Each and every infelicity
> was fixed within a day or so, and we always make candidate releases
> available—the current Rcpp as of this writing is 1.0.4.12 meaning twelve
> microreleases were made since 1.0.4. And those microreleases are always
> available for normal download and install.packages use via the Rcpp drat
> repository accessible to all. So it was truly troubling to see some,
> especially those with experience in setting up or running testing / ci
> platforms, pretend to be unable to access, install, and provide these
> for
> their own tests, or the tests of their users. It just doesn’t pass a
> basic
> logic test: it takes a single call to install.packages(), or, even more
> easily, a single assignment of an auxiliary repo. All told this was a
> rather sad experience.
>
> So let’s try to not repeat this. If you, or maybe users of a build or ci
> system you maintain, rely on Rcpp, and especially if you do so on
> systems
> outside the standard CRAN grid of three OSs and the triplet of
> “previous,
> current, next” releases of R, then please help by testing. I maitain
> these
> release as a volunteer, unpaid at that, and I simply cannot expand to
> more
> systesm. We take reverse dependency check seriously (and I just run two
> taking about a day each) but if you insist on building on stranger
> hardware or much older releases it will be up to you to ensure Rcpp
> passes. We prep for CRAN, and try our best to pass at CRAN. For nearly a
> dozen years.
>
> To install the current microrelease from the Rcpp drat repository, just
> do
>
> install.packages("Rcpp", repos="https://rcppcore.github.io/drat";)
>
> That is all there is to it. You could even add the Rcpp drat repository
> to
> your repository list.
>
> Rcpp has become successful because so many people help with suggestions,
> documentation, and code. It is used by (as of today) 1958 CRAN packages,
> 205 BioConductor packages, and downloaded around a million times per
> month. So if you can, please help now with some more testing.
>
> If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me
> at
> GitHub. For the first year, GitHub will match your contributions.
>
> This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box
> blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit
> settings.
>
> /code/rcpp | permanent
> link
>
>
>
> --
> http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
> _______________________________________________
> Rcpp-devel mailing list
> Rcpp-devel@lists.r-forge.r-project.org
> https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
_______________________________________________
Rcpp-devel mailing list
Rcpp-devel@lists.r-forge.r-project.org
https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
