search for: revdepchecks

Hi, Jim: Could you please look at svd2.Rd and see what it says? It may give an example, where it gave a better answer than svd -- i.e., a marginal case, where svd2 honestly gave a better answer than svd. If we find -- either in svd2.Rd or in one of the revdepchecks -- an example where svd2 gives a demonstrably different answer, we need to consider what to do about that. 1. Is the different answer demonstrably better? If yes, can we fix it without LINPACK? If yes, do that. If no, we document those concerns, send them to R-Devel <r-devel at r...

I remember there was advice about a server that one could use for reverse dependency checks, but I forgot to write it down.? (Or I did save the info and forgot where I saved it...)?? I have been doing the checks for survival myself, but the count is getting out of hand (663, not counting bioconductor). Any pointers? Terry Therneau [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Background: I run tools::testInstalledPackage on all packages that dependend on survival (605 as of today) before sending a new release to CRAN. It has a few false positives which I then follow up on.? (Mostly packages with as-yet-incomplete tests in their inst directory). ?Issue: testInstalledPackage("mets")? generates an? "Error in checkVignettes(pkg, lib.loc, latex = FALSE,