Dear Rolf, (Moving this one to R-devel...) On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 21:01:13 +0000 Rolf Turner <rolfturner at posteo.net> wrote:> I *really* think that the instructions from CRAN could have been > clearer! Without your guidance I'd have been at a total loss.Since the CRAN e-mails quote the R CMD check messages verbatim, would it have been enough if R CMD check suggested using --compact-vignettes? Index: src/library/tools/R/check.R ==================================================================--- src/library/tools/R/check.R (revision 85249) +++ src/library/tools/R/check.R (working copy) @@ -3079,7 +3079,8 @@ " 'qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), "\n", - " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files\n") + " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files,\n", + " or build the source package with --compact-vignettes\n") } if (R_check_doc_sizes2) { gs_cmd <- find_gs_cmd() @@ -3093,7 +3094,8 @@ " 'gs+qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), "\n", - ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files\n') + ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files,\n', + ' or build the source package with --compact-vignettes=both\n') } } else { if (!any) noteLog(Log) Or is there anything else you would prefer to be reworded? Should the message link to Writing R Extensions, section 1.4? Recently there was a project to improve the R CMD check messages [*], but I managed to miss almost all of it. -- Best regards, Ivan [*] https://github.com/r-devel/r-project-sprint-2023/issues/55
Michael Dewey
2023-Oct-02 15:35 UTC
[Rd] [R-pkg-devel] Problem with "compacting" pdf files.
Dear Ivan I was bitten by this recently but fortunately Rolf had beaten me to writing a question. The one thing which really surprised me is that the current message tells me how much space it would have saved if it had compressed the files in which case my immediate response was "Well, why didn't you compress them then?". Thank you for your help on this. Michael On 02/10/2023 12:58, Ivan Krylov wrote:> Dear Rolf, > > (Moving this one to R-devel...) > > On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 21:01:13 +0000 > Rolf Turner <rolfturner at posteo.net> wrote: > >> I *really* think that the instructions from CRAN could have been >> clearer! Without your guidance I'd have been at a total loss. > > Since the CRAN e-mails quote the R CMD check messages verbatim, would > it have been enough if R CMD check suggested using --compact-vignettes? > > Index: src/library/tools/R/check.R > ==================================================================> --- src/library/tools/R/check.R (revision 85249) > +++ src/library/tools/R/check.R (working copy) > @@ -3079,7 +3079,8 @@ > " 'qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", > paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), > "\n", > - " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files\n") > + " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files,\n", > + " or build the source package with --compact-vignettes\n") > } > if (R_check_doc_sizes2) { > gs_cmd <- find_gs_cmd() > @@ -3093,7 +3094,8 @@ > " 'gs+qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", > paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), > "\n", > - ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files\n') > + ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files,\n', > + ' or build the source package with --compact-vignettes=both\n') > } > } else { > if (!any) noteLog(Log) > > Or is there anything else you would prefer to be reworded? Should the > message link to Writing R Extensions, section 1.4? Recently there was a > project to improve the R CMD check messages [*], but I managed to miss > almost all of it. >-- Michael
>>>>> Ivan Krylov writes:Thanks: committed now. Best -k> Dear Rolf, > (Moving this one to R-devel...)> On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 21:01:13 +0000 > Rolf Turner <rolfturner at posteo.net> wrote:>> I *really* think that the instructions from CRAN could have been >> clearer! Without your guidance I'd have been at a total loss.> Since the CRAN e-mails quote the R CMD check messages verbatim, would > it have been enough if R CMD check suggested using --compact-vignettes?> Index: src/library/tools/R/check.R > ==================================================================> --- src/library/tools/R/check.R (revision 85249) > +++ src/library/tools/R/check.R (working copy) > @@ -3079,7 +3079,8 @@ > " 'qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", > paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), > "\n", > - " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files\n") > + " consider running tools::compactPDF() on these files,\n", > + " or build the source package with --compact-vignettes\n") > } > if (R_check_doc_sizes2) { > gs_cmd <- find_gs_cmd() > @@ -3093,7 +3094,8 @@ > " 'gs+qpdf' made some significant size reductions:\n", > paste(" ", res, collapse = "\n"), > "\n", > - ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files\n') > + ' consider running tools::compactPDF(gs_quality = "ebook") on these files,\n', > + ' or build the source package with --compact-vignettes=both\n') > } > } else { > if (!any) noteLog(Log)> Or is there anything else you would prefer to be reworded? Should the > message link to Writing R Extensions, section 1.4? Recently there was a > project to improve the R CMD check messages [*], but I managed to miss > almost all of it.> -- > Best regards, > Ivan> [*] https://github.com/r-devel/r-project-sprint-2023/issues/55> ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel