Dear package developers,
We've recently received an email letting us know that our package
rvinecopulib (
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rvinecopulib/index.html) would be
removed from CRAN unless the errors from the solaris build were corrected.
Note that the package compile and the unit
El sáb., 11 ago. 2018 a las 19:30, Thibault Vatter
() escribió:
>
> Dear package developers,
>
> We've recently received an email letting us know that our package
> rvinecopulib (
> https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rvinecopulib/index.html) would be
> removed from CRAN unless the errors from
Yes, the non-portable call to log which causes the current build to fail on
solaris has been corrected in a development version. However, the segfault
that we don't understand and were asked to correct was present in the
previous versions (e.g., 0.2.8.1.0 and 0.2.7.1.0), and we believe that it
is l
El sáb., 11 ago. 2018 a las 20:41, Thibault Vatter
() escribió:
>
> Yes, the non-portable call to log which causes the current build to fail on
> solaris has been corrected in a development version. However, the segfault
> that we don't understand and were asked to correct was present in the
> p
In this case, using r-hub while removing the suggested dependencies (and
commenting related unit tests) should work. The drawback is that r-hub for
solaris installs all the dependencies at every build (as far as I
understand), so hunting for a segfault will be extremely time-consuming,
but I will s
Have you tried asking CRAN for help? I mean, if you don't fix an obvious error,
with a well-known cause, like the log thing, they'll get fed up and throw you
off. However, fixing and then discovering an issue elsewhere is different,
especially if you cannot easily reproduce it at your end.
-pd