On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 2:13 AM Martin Maechler
wrote:
>
> > Gabriel Becker
> > on Tue, 4 May 2021 14:40:22 -0700 writes:
>
> > Hmm, that's fair enough Ben, I stand corrected. I will say that this
> seems
> > to be a pretty "soft" recommendation, as these things go, given
On 5 May 2021 at 05:42, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
| I think it would be useful to issue some kind of warning if tests are
| skipped. As mentioned earlier, this is impossible in user-contributed
| packages, which can only return OK or ERROR from their tests.
Seconded!
Dirk
--
On 05/05/2021 5:13 a.m., Martin Maechler wrote:
Gabriel Becker
on Tue, 4 May 2021 14:40:22 -0700 writes:
> Hmm, that's fair enough Ben, I stand corrected. I will say that this
seems
> to be a pretty "soft" recommendation, as these things go, given that it
> isn't tested
> Gabriel Becker
> on Tue, 4 May 2021 14:40:22 -0700 writes:
> Hmm, that's fair enough Ben, I stand corrected. I will say that this
seems
> to be a pretty "soft" recommendation, as these things go, given that it
> isn't tested for by R CMD check, including with the
Hmm, that's fair enough Ben, I stand corrected. I will say that this seems
to be a pretty "soft" recommendation, as these things go, given that it
isn't tested for by R CMD check, including with the -as-cran extensions. In
principle, it seems like it could be, similar checks are made in package
On 4 May 2021 at 14:10, Gabriel Becker wrote:
| A couple of things. Firstly, so far asI have ever heard, it's valid that a
| package have hard dependencies in its tests for packages listed only in
| Suggests. In fact, that is one of the stated purposes of Suggests. An
| argument could be made,
Sorry if this has been pointed out already, but some relevant text
from
https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-exts.html#Suggested-packages
> Note that someone wanting to run the examples/tests/vignettes may not
have a suggested package available (and it may not even be
Hi Henrik,
A couple of things. Firstly, so far asI have ever heard, it's valid that a
package have hard dependencies in its tests for packages listed only in
Suggests. In fact, that is one of the stated purposes of Suggests. An
argument could be made, I suppose, that the base packages should be
Two questions to R Core:
1. Is R designed so that 'recommended' packages are optional, or
should that be considered uncharted territories?
2. Can such an R build/installation be validated using existing check methods?
--
Dirk, it's not clear to me whether you know for sure, or you draw
On 4 May 2021 at 11:25, Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
| FWIW,
|
| $ ./configure --help
| ...
| --with-recommended-packages
| use/install recommended R packages [yes]
Of course. But look at the verb in your Subject: no optionality _in testing_
there.
You obviously need
FWIW,
$ ./configure --help
...
--with-recommended-packages
use/install recommended R packages [yes]
/Henrik
On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 11:17 AM Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
>
> On 4 May 2021 at 11:07, Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
> | Thanks, but I don't understand. That's what
On 4 May 2021 at 11:07, Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
| Thanks, but I don't understand. That's what I usually do when I build
| R with 'recommended' packages. But here, I explicitly do *not* want
| to build and install 'recommended' packages with the R installation.
| So, I'm going down the
Thanks, but I don't understand. That's what I usually do when I build
R with 'recommended' packages. But here, I explicitly do *not* want
to build and install 'recommended' packages with the R installation.
So, I'm going down the --without-recommended-packages path on purpose
and I'm looking for
On 4 May 2021 at 09:31, Henrik Bengtsson wrote:
| I'm on Linux (Ubuntu 18.04). How do I check an R build when using
| --without-recommended-packages? 'make check' assumes 'recommended'
| packages are installed, so that fails without them available.
[...]
| BTW, isn't this a bug? Shouldn't this
14 matches
Mail list logo
