Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
A hack that seems to work is (whitespace added for readability):
\newcommand{\Seqn}{
\ifelse{latex}{
\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion() < "4.2.2") "eqn{#1}" else
"eqn{#2}"}
}{
\ifelse{html}{
\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion() < "4.2.0") "eqn{#1}"
else "eqn{#2}"}
}{
\Sexpr[results=rd]{"eqn{#2}"}
}
}
}
as amsmath support for PDF output and KaTeX support for HTML output
were introduced in R 4.2.2 and 4.2.0, respectively.
Sadly I really do seem to need 8 escapes:
\Seqn{text{min}(m,n) times n}{min(m,n)-by-n}
Maybe one of the Rd experts here can suggest an improvement ...
Mikael
On 2023-11-01 5:06 am, Martin Maechler wrote:
Uwe Ligges
on Wed, 1 Nov 2023 06:26:23 +0100 writes:
> On 01.11.2023 03:51, Mikael Jagan wrote:
>> Thanks. It seems that we were mistaken in our feeling (IIRC) that it
would
>> be "OK" to implicitly require '--no-manual' on versions of R from 3.5.0
to
>> 4.2.1, not changing our Depends.
>>
>> We will fix this in Matrix 1.6-2, probably by conditionalizing or
otherwise
>> replacing the amsmath commands and probably _not_ by changing to depend
on
>> R >= 4.2.2. Martin may have more to say in "the morning".
I agree (*not* to raise Matrix pkg's R version dependency).
> Note that dependin on R >= 4.2.2 does not work. We need dependencies of
> the form R >= x.y.0. This is also part of the checks.
Yes, indeed.
And as we learned, R >= 4.2.0 would not help for r-oldrel-macos
I (am unhappy but) agree to take the responsibility for our
decision to go ahead and use much nicer LaTeX formula for
matrices etc, in our help pages {thinking that indeed people who'd
install Matrix on an old R version would always be able to read
Matrix manual pages via web search (as it seems to me 95% of
people do nowadays) ... or then have someone in their
organization to figure out how to use a newer amsmath (latex) package if
they really really want the Matrix pdf manual offline}.
Martin
> Reason is that we have only one binary repository for one R-x.y.?
> series. On WIndows, where we check with R-4.2.3, a binary would be
> created and hence R-4.2.[0-1] would not see any valid Matrix binaries.
> So please either make this work on R >= 4.2.0 or require R >= 4.3.0. If
> the latter, ideally with an interim version that works for R >= 4.2.0,
> so that we valid binaries with correct dependency declarations again.
> Best,
> Uwe
>> In the mean time (i.e., while we are stuck with Matrix 1.6-1.1), it may
>> help
>> to update to R 4.2.3 on r-oldrel-macos-* and/or to have EdSurvey revert
its
>> strict version requirement, unless there are clear examples justifying
one.
>>
>> Mikael
>>
>>
>> On 2023-10-31 8:17 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>>> Mikael,
>>>
>>> in that case I think your requirements are wrong - Matrix says R >=
>>> 3.5.0 which is apparently incorrect - from what you say it should be
>>> 4.2.2?. I can certainly update to 4.2.3 if necessary.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 1/11/2023, at 9:19 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote:
Thanks. We did see those ERRORs, stemming from use (since Matrix
1.6-0)
of amsmath commands in Rd files. These have been supported since R
4.2.2,
but r-oldrel-macos-* (unlike r-oldrel-windows-*) continues to run R
4.2.0.
My expectation was that those machines would begin running R >= 4.2.2
well
before the R 4.4.0 release, but apparently that was wrong.
I am hesitant to complicate our Rd files with conditions on R versions
only to support PDF output for R < 4.2.2, but maybe we can consider it
for the Matrix 1.6-2 release if it is really a barrier for others ...
Mikael
On 2023-10-31 3:33 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote:
> Mikael,
> current Matrix fails checks on R-oldrel so that's why only the last
> working version is installed:
> https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Matrix.html
> Cheers,
> Simon
On 1/11/2023, at 4:05 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote:
>>
I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey:
>>
https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html
>>
Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64,
even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z.
>>
AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and
even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo
handling
of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0).
>>
So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1.
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
On 2023-11-01 12:59 pm, Mikael Jagan wrote:
A hack that seems to work is (whitespace added for readability):
\newcommand{\Seqn}{
\ifelse{latex}{
\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion() < "4.2.2") "eqn{#1}" else
"eqn{#2}"}
}{
\ifelse{html}{
\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion() < "4.2.0") "eqn{#1}"
else "eqn{#2}"}
}{
\Sexpr[results=rd]{"eqn{#2}"}
}
}
}
Er, the above is wrong, because '<' should be '>=' and because '#2' (which
is conceptually verbatim text) should use \verb{} for PDF and HTML output,
not \eqn{}. For Matrix 1.6-2 I have created man/macros/local.Rd and added:
\newcommand{\Seqn}{\ifelse{latex}{\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion() >=
"4.2.2") "eqn{#1}" else
"verb{#2}"}}{\ifelse{html}{\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion() >=
"4.2.0") "eqn{#1}" else
"verb{#2}"}}{\Sexpr[results=rd]{"eqn{#2}"
\newcommand{\Sdeqn}{\ifelse{latex}{\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion() >=
"4.2.2") "deqn{#1}" else
"preformatted{#2}"}}{\ifelse{html}{\Sexpr[results=rd]{if (getRversion()
>= "4.2.0") "deqn{#1}" else
"preformatted{#2}"}}{\Sexpr[results=rd]{"deqn{#2}"
Now Matrix 1.6-2 passes its Rd checks under my checkout of R-3-5-branch.
Some examples and tests fail for unrelated reasons. I'll fix those, too ...
Mikael
as amsmath support for PDF output and KaTeX support for HTML output
were introduced in R 4.2.2 and 4.2.0, respectively.
Sadly I really do seem to need 8 escapes:
\Seqn{text{min}(m,n) times n}{min(m,n)-by-n}
Maybe one of the Rd experts here can suggest an improvement ...
Mikael
On 2023-11-01 5:06 am, Martin Maechler wrote:
Uwe Ligges
on Wed, 1 Nov 2023 06:26:23 +0100 writes:
> On 01.11.2023 03:51, Mikael Jagan wrote:
>> Thanks. It seems that we were mistaken in our feeling (IIRC) that it
would
>> be "OK" to implicitly require '--no-manual' on versions of R from
3.5.0 to
>> 4.2.1, not changing our Depends.
>>
>> We will fix this in Matrix 1.6-2, probably by conditionalizing or
otherwise
>> replacing the amsmath commands and probably _not_ by changing to
depend on
>> R >= 4.2.2. Martin may have more to say in "the morning".
I agree (*not* to raise Matrix pkg's R version dependency).
> Note that dependin on R >= 4.2.2 does not work. We need dependencies of
> the form R >= x.y.0. This is also part of the checks.
Yes, indeed.
And as we learned, R >= 4.2.0 would not help for r-oldrel-macos
I (am unhappy but) agree to take the responsibility for our
decision to go ahead and use much nicer LaTeX formula for
matrices etc, in our help pages {thinking that indeed people who'd
install Matrix on an old R version would always be able to read
Matrix manual pages via web search (as it seems to me 95% of
people do nowadays) ... or then have someone in their
organization to figure out how to use a newer amsmath (latex) package if
they really really want the Matrix pdf manual offline}.
Martin
> Reason is that we have only one binary repository for one R-x.y.?
> series. On WIndows, where we check with R-4.2.3, a binary would be
> created and hence R-4.2.[0-1] would not see any valid Matrix binaries.
> So please either make this work on R >= 4.2.0 or require R >= 4.3.0. If
> the latter, ideally with an interim version that works for R >= 4.2.0,
> so that we valid binaries with correct dependency declarations again.
> Best,
> Uwe
>> In the mean time (i.e., while we are stuck with Matrix 1.6-1.1), it may
>> help
>> to update to R 4.2.3 on r-oldrel-macos-* and/or to have EdSurvey
revert its
>> strict version requirement, unless there are clear examples justifying
one.
>>
>> Mikael
>>
>>
>> On 2023-10-31 8:17 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>>> Mikael,
>>>
>>> in that case I think your requirements are wrong - Matrix says R >=
>>> 3.5.0 which is apparently incorrect - from what you say it should be
>>> 4.2.2?. I can certainly update to 4.2.3 if necessary.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 1/11/2023, at 9:19 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote:
Thanks. We did see those ERRORs, stemming from use (since Matrix
1.6-0)
of amsmath commands in Rd files. These have been supported since R
4.2.2,
but r-oldrel-macos-* (unlike r-oldrel-windows-*) continues to run R
4.2.0.
My expectation was that those machines would begin running R >= 4.2.2
well
before the R 4.4.0 release, but apparently that was wrong.
I am hesitant to complicate our Rd files with conditions on R
versions
only to support PDF
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
> Uwe Ligges
> on Wed, 1 Nov 2023 06:26:23 +0100 writes:
> On 01.11.2023 03:51, Mikael Jagan wrote:
>> Thanks. It seems that we were mistaken in our feeling (IIRC) that it
would
>> be "OK" to implicitly require '--no-manual' on versions of R from 3.5.0
to
>> 4.2.1, not changing our Depends.
>>
>> We will fix this in Matrix 1.6-2, probably by conditionalizing or
otherwise
>> replacing the amsmath commands and probably _not_ by changing to depend
on
>> R >= 4.2.2. Martin may have more to say in "the morning".
I agree (*not* to raise Matrix pkg's R version dependency).
> Note that dependin on R >= 4.2.2 does not work. We need dependencies of
> the form R >= x.y.0. This is also part of the checks.
Yes, indeed.
And as we learned, R >= 4.2.0 would not help for r-oldrel-macos
I (am unhappy but) agree to take the responsibility for our
decision to go ahead and use much nicer LaTeX formula for
matrices etc, in our help pages {thinking that indeed people who'd
install Matrix on an old R version would always be able to read
Matrix manual pages via web search (as it seems to me 95% of
people do nowadays) ... or then have someone in their
organization to figure out how to use a newer amsmath (latex) package if
they really really want the Matrix pdf manual offline}.
Martin
> Reason is that we have only one binary repository for one R-x.y.?
> series. On WIndows, where we check with R-4.2.3, a binary would be
> created and hence R-4.2.[0-1] would not see any valid Matrix binaries.
> So please either make this work on R >= 4.2.0 or require R >= 4.3.0. If
> the latter, ideally with an interim version that works for R >= 4.2.0,
> so that we valid binaries with correct dependency declarations again.
> Best,
> Uwe
>> In the mean time (i.e., while we are stuck with Matrix 1.6-1.1), it may
>> help
>> to update to R 4.2.3 on r-oldrel-macos-* and/or to have EdSurvey revert
its
>> strict version requirement, unless there are clear examples justifying
one.
>>
>> Mikael
>>
>>
>> On 2023-10-31 8:17 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>>> Mikael,
>>>
>>> in that case I think your requirements are wrong - Matrix says R >=
>>> 3.5.0 which is apparently incorrect - from what you say it should be
>>> 4.2.2?. I can certainly update to 4.2.3 if necessary.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 1/11/2023, at 9:19 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote:
Thanks. We did see those ERRORs, stemming from use (since Matrix
1.6-0)
of amsmath commands in Rd files. These have been supported since R
4.2.2,
but r-oldrel-macos-* (unlike r-oldrel-windows-*) continues to run R
4.2.0.
My expectation was that those machines would begin running R >= 4.2.2
well
before the R 4.4.0 release, but apparently that was wrong.
I am hesitant to complicate our Rd files with conditions on R versions
only to support PDF output for R < 4.2.2, but maybe we can consider it
for the Matrix 1.6-2 release if it is really a barrier for others ...
Mikael
On 2023-10-31 3:33 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote:
> Mikael,
> current Matrix fails checks on R-oldrel so that's why only the last
> working version is installed:
> https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Matrix.html
> Cheers,
> Simon
> On 1/11/2023, at 4:05 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote:
>>
> I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey:
>>
> https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html
>>
> Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64,
> even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z.
>>
> AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and
> even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo
> handling
> of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0).
>>
> So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1. Requiring 1.6-0
> might make sense, if somehow EdSurvey depends on how class sparseQR
> preserves dimnames. But IIRC our rev. dep. checks at that time did
> not
> reveal problems with EdSurvey.
>>
> Mikael
>>
> On 2023-10-31 7:00 am, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
>>> Paul,
>>> can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and
>>> where you got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest
>>> Matrix.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Simon
On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via
R-package-devel wrote:
Hi,
I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
On 01.11.2023 03:51, Mikael Jagan wrote: Thanks. It seems that we were mistaken in our feeling (IIRC) that it would be "OK" to implicitly require '--no-manual' on versions of R from 3.5.0 to 4.2.1, not changing our Depends. We will fix this in Matrix 1.6-2, probably by conditionalizing or otherwise replacing the amsmath commands and probably _not_ by changing to depend on R >= 4.2.2. Martin may have more to say in "the morning". Note that dependin on R >= 4.2.2 does not work. We need dependencies of the form R >= x.y.0. This is also part of the checks. Reason is that we have only one binary repository for one R-x.y.? series. On WIndows, where we check with R-4.2.3, a binary would be created and hence R-4.2.[0-1] would not see any valid Matrix binaries. So please either make this work on R >= 4.2.0 or require R >= 4.3.0. If the latter, ideally with an interim version that works for R >= 4.2.0, so that we valid binaries with correct dependency declarations again. Best, Uwe In the mean time (i.e., while we are stuck with Matrix 1.6-1.1), it may help to update to R 4.2.3 on r-oldrel-macos-* and/or to have EdSurvey revert its strict version requirement, unless there are clear examples justifying one. Mikael On 2023-10-31 8:17 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote: Mikael, in that case I think your requirements are wrong - Matrix says R >= 3.5.0 which is apparently incorrect - from what you say it should be 4.2.2?. I can certainly update to 4.2.3 if necessary. Cheers, Simon On 1/11/2023, at 9:19 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: Thanks. We did see those ERRORs, stemming from use (since Matrix 1.6-0) of amsmath commands in Rd files. These have been supported since R 4.2.2, but r-oldrel-macos-* (unlike r-oldrel-windows-*) continues to run R 4.2.0. My expectation was that those machines would begin running R >= 4.2.2 well before the R 4.4.0 release, but apparently that was wrong. I am hesitant to complicate our Rd files with conditions on R versions only to support PDF output for R < 4.2.2, but maybe we can consider it for the Matrix 1.6-2 release if it is really a barrier for others ... Mikael On 2023-10-31 3:33 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote: Mikael, current Matrix fails checks on R-oldrel so that's why only the last working version is installed: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Matrix.html Cheers, Simon On 1/11/2023, at 4:05 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64, even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z. AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo handling of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0). So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1. Requiring 1.6-0 might make sense, if somehow EdSurvey depends on how class sparseQR preserves dimnames. But IIRC our rev. dep. checks at that time did not reveal problems with EdSurvey. Mikael On 2023-10-31 7:00 am, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: Paul, can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and where you got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest Matrix. Cheers, Simon On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via R-package-devel wrote: Hi, I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing CRAN checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required version (the latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the latest Matrix package because of how qr works and I thought, given the apparent API change, I should then require the latest version. My error is, "Package required and available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, what the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. What version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, so I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't bother CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? Best, Paul [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ 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
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
Thanks. It seems that we were mistaken in our feeling (IIRC) that it would be "OK" to implicitly require '--no-manual' on versions of R from 3.5.0 to 4.2.1, not changing our Depends. We will fix this in Matrix 1.6-2, probably by conditionalizing or otherwise replacing the amsmath commands and probably _not_ by changing to depend on R >= 4.2.2. Martin may have more to say in "the morning". In the mean time (i.e., while we are stuck with Matrix 1.6-1.1), it may help to update to R 4.2.3 on r-oldrel-macos-* and/or to have EdSurvey revert its strict version requirement, unless there are clear examples justifying one. Mikael On 2023-10-31 8:17 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote: Mikael, in that case I think your requirements are wrong - Matrix says R >= 3.5.0 which is apparently incorrect - from what you say it should be 4.2.2?. I can certainly update to 4.2.3 if necessary. Cheers, Simon On 1/11/2023, at 9:19 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: Thanks. We did see those ERRORs, stemming from use (since Matrix 1.6-0) of amsmath commands in Rd files. These have been supported since R 4.2.2, but r-oldrel-macos-* (unlike r-oldrel-windows-*) continues to run R 4.2.0. My expectation was that those machines would begin running R >= 4.2.2 well before the R 4.4.0 release, but apparently that was wrong. I am hesitant to complicate our Rd files with conditions on R versions only to support PDF output for R < 4.2.2, but maybe we can consider it for the Matrix 1.6-2 release if it is really a barrier for others ... Mikael On 2023-10-31 3:33 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote: Mikael, current Matrix fails checks on R-oldrel so that's why only the last working version is installed: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Matrix.html Cheers, Simon On 1/11/2023, at 4:05 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64, even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z. AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo handling of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0). So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1. Requiring 1.6-0 might make sense, if somehow EdSurvey depends on how class sparseQR preserves dimnames. But IIRC our rev. dep. checks at that time did not reveal problems with EdSurvey. Mikael On 2023-10-31 7:00 am, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: Paul, can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and where you got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest Matrix. Cheers, Simon On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via R-package-devel wrote: Hi, I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing CRAN checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required version (the latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the latest Matrix package because of how qr works and I thought, given the apparent API change, I should then require the latest version. My error is, "Package required and available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, what the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. What version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, so I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't bother CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? Best, Paul [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
Mikael, in that case I think your requirements are wrong - Matrix says R >= 3.5.0 which is apparently incorrect - from what you say it should be 4.2.2?. I can certainly update to 4.2.3 if necessary. Cheers, Simon > On 1/11/2023, at 9:19 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: > > Thanks. We did see those ERRORs, stemming from use (since Matrix 1.6-0) > of amsmath commands in Rd files. These have been supported since R 4.2.2, > but r-oldrel-macos-* (unlike r-oldrel-windows-*) continues to run R 4.2.0. > My expectation was that those machines would begin running R >= 4.2.2 well > before the R 4.4.0 release, but apparently that was wrong. > > I am hesitant to complicate our Rd files with conditions on R versions > only to support PDF output for R < 4.2.2, but maybe we can consider it > for the Matrix 1.6-2 release if it is really a barrier for others ... > > Mikael > > On 2023-10-31 3:33 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote: >> Mikael, >> current Matrix fails checks on R-oldrel so that's why only the last working >> version is installed: >> https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Matrix.html >> Cheers, >> Simon >>> On 1/11/2023, at 4:05 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: >>> >>> I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey: >>> >>>https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html >>> >>> Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64, >>> even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z. >>> >>> AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and >>> even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo handling >>> of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0). >>> >>> So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1. Requiring 1.6-0 >>> might make sense, if somehow EdSurvey depends on how class sparseQR >>> preserves dimnames. But IIRC our rev. dep. checks at that time did not >>> reveal problems with EdSurvey. >>> >>> Mikael >>> >>> On 2023-10-31 7:00 am, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: Paul, can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and where you got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest Matrix. Cheers, Simon > On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via > R-package-devel wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing > CRAN checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required > version (the latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the > latest Matrix package because of how qr works and I thought, given the > apparent API change, I should then require the latest version. My error > is, "Package required and available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" > > When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, > what the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. > What version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this > documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, > so I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't > bother CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? > > Best, > Paul > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >>> > __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
Thanks. We did see those ERRORs, stemming from use (since Matrix 1.6-0) of amsmath commands in Rd files. These have been supported since R 4.2.2, but r-oldrel-macos-* (unlike r-oldrel-windows-*) continues to run R 4.2.0. My expectation was that those machines would begin running R >= 4.2.2 well before the R 4.4.0 release, but apparently that was wrong. I am hesitant to complicate our Rd files with conditions on R versions only to support PDF output for R < 4.2.2, but maybe we can consider it for the Matrix 1.6-2 release if it is really a barrier for others ... Mikael On 2023-10-31 3:33 pm, Simon Urbanek wrote: Mikael, current Matrix fails checks on R-oldrel so that's why only the last working version is installed: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Matrix.html Cheers, Simon On 1/11/2023, at 4:05 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64, even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z. AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo handling of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0). So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1. Requiring 1.6-0 might make sense, if somehow EdSurvey depends on how class sparseQR preserves dimnames. But IIRC our rev. dep. checks at that time did not reveal problems with EdSurvey. Mikael On 2023-10-31 7:00 am, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: Paul, can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and where you got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest Matrix. Cheers, Simon On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via R-package-devel wrote: Hi, I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing CRAN checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required version (the latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the latest Matrix package because of how qr works and I thought, given the apparent API change, I should then require the latest version. My error is, "Package required and available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, what the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. What version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, so I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't bother CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? Best, Paul [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
Mikael, current Matrix fails checks on R-oldrel so that's why only the last working version is installed: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_Matrix.html Cheers, Simon > On 1/11/2023, at 4:05 AM, Mikael Jagan wrote: > > I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey: > >https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html > > Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64, > even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z. > > AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and > even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo handling > of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0). > > So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1. Requiring 1.6-0 > might make sense, if somehow EdSurvey depends on how class sparseQR > preserves dimnames. But IIRC our rev. dep. checks at that time did not > reveal problems with EdSurvey. > > Mikael > > On 2023-10-31 7:00 am, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: >> Paul, >> can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and where you >> got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest Matrix. >> Cheers, >> Simon >>> On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via >>> R-package-devel wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing >>> CRAN checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required >>> version (the latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the >>> latest Matrix package because of how qr works and I thought, given the >>> apparent API change, I should then require the latest version. My error is, >>> "Package required and available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" >>> >>> When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, >>> what the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. >>> What version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this >>> documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, so >>> I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't bother >>> CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? >>> >>> Best, >>> Paul >>> >>> [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
Re-sending to the list with correct subject line ... I should undigest myself ... Mikael On 2023-10-31 11:05 am, Mikael Jagan wrote: I am guessing that they mean EdSurvey: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_EdSurvey.html Probably Matrix 1.6-1.1 is not installed on r-oldrel-macos-arm64, even though it can be, because it was not released until R 4.3-z. AFAIK, methods for 'qr' have not been touched since Matrix 1.6-0, and even those changes should have been backwards compatible, modulo handling of dimnames (class sparseQR gained a Dimnames slot in 1.6-0). So I don't see a clear reason for requiring 1.6-1.1. Requiring 1.6-0 might make sense, if somehow EdSurvey depends on how class sparseQR preserves dimnames. But IIRC our rev. dep. checks at that time did not reveal problems with EdSurvey. Mikael On 2023-10-31 7:00 am, r-package-devel-requ...@r-project.org wrote: Paul, can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and where you got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest Matrix. Cheers, Simon On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via R-package-devel wrote: Hi, I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing CRAN checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required version (the latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the latest Matrix package because of how qr works and I thought, given the apparent API change, I should then require the latest version. My error is, "Package required and available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, what the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. What version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, so I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't bother CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? Best, Paul [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
Paul, can you give us a bit more detail? Which package, which build and where you got the errors? Older builds may not have the latest Matrix. Cheers, Simon > On 31/10/2023, at 11:26 AM, Bailey, Paul via R-package-devel > wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing CRAN > checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required version (the > latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the latest Matrix > package because of how qr works and I thought, given the apparent API change, > I should then require the latest version. My error is, "Package required and > available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" > > When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, what > the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. What > version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this > documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, so > I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't bother > CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? > > Best, > Paul > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > __ > 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-pkg-devel] Matrix and Mac OS
Hi, I'm the maintainer for a few packages, one of which is currently failing CRAN checks on Mac OS because Matrix is not available in my required version (the latest). I had to fix a few things due to changes in the latest Matrix package because of how qr works and I thought, given the apparent API change, I should then require the latest version. My error is, "Package required and available but unsuitable version: 'Matrix'" When I look at the NEWS in Matrix there is no mention of Mac OS issues, what the latest stable version of Matrix is, nor when a fix is expected. What version do MacOS version test Matrix with by default? Where is this documented? I assumes it always tested with the latest version on CRAN, so I'm a bit surprised. Or will this be resolved soon and I shouldn't bother CRAN maintainers with a new version of my package? Best, Paul [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
