similar to: Suggested dependencies in context of R CMD check

Jan and Hadley, There's also the issue of tests, vignettes, or examples requiring Suggested packages (one of the core applications of Suggests, in fact). These are all checked by R CMD check, so to ensure any package which should pass check would do so without suggested packages installed would require turning all of those checks off, which takes quite a few of the teeth out of R CMD check

On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Jan G?recki <J.Gorecki at wit.edu.pl> wrote: > Dear R team, > > Are suggested dependencies mandatory in context of `R CMD check` when > using env var `_R_CHECK_FORCE_SUGGESTS_=FALSE`? > > Suggested dependencies are nice because are optional. > But that feature often isn't valid when trying to run `R CMD check` on them. > I would

Dear Joris, So it does looks like the proposed function makes a lot sense then, isn't it? Cheers, Jan On 16 June 2016 at 08:37, Joris Meys <jorismeys at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Jan, > > It is unavoidable to have OS and R dependencies for devtools. The building > process for packages is both OS and R dependent, so devtools has to be too > according to my understanding.

Hi all, Packages tools and utils have a lot of useful stuff for R developers. I find one task still not as straightforward as it could. Simply to extract dependencies of a package from DESCRIPTION file (before it is even installed to library). This would be valuable in automation of CI setup in a more meta-data driven way. The simple function below, I know it is short and simple, but having it to

Hi Michael, Are you willing to accept patch for this? I'm already using this and few related functions for a while, it plays well. I could wrap it as patch to utils, or tools? Best, Jan On 16 June 2016 at 14:00, Michael Lawrence <lawrence.michael at gene.com> wrote: > I agree that the utils package needs some improvements related to > this, and hope to make them eventually. This

On 4 April 2016 at 07:25, Hadley Wickham wrote: | On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Jan G?recki <J.Gorecki at wit.edu.pl> wrote: | | In principle, I believe a package should pass R CMD check if no | suggested packages are installed. However, since this is not currently The relevant manual says The 'Suggests' field uses the same syntax as 'Depends' and lists packages

Dear R-devs, Scenario: When checking a package via `R CMD check package_tar.ball`, required / suggested packages may be missing. R subsequently returns a list of packages that are missing (delimited by spaces). Example: ``` R CMD check glmSparseNet_0.99.13.tar.gz * using log directory '/home/ubuntu/Bioconductor/glmSparseNet.Rcheck' * using R Under development (unstable) (2018-06-06

On 04/04/2016 01:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 04/04/2016 1:35 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: >> On 4 April 2016 at 07:25, Hadley Wickham wrote: >> | On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Jan G?recki <J.Gorecki at wit.edu.pl> >> wrote: >> | >> | In principle, I believe a package should pass R CMD check if no >> | suggested packages are installed. However,

Thank you Gabriel, Just for future readers. Below is a base R way to address this common problem, as instructed by you (+stopifnot to suppress print). Rscript -e 'stopifnot(file.copy("DESCRIPTION", file.path(tdir<-tempdir(), "PACKAGES"))); db<-available.packages(paste0("file://", tdir));

Hi all, I'm trying to understand how the search path and namespaces interact. For example, take the devtools package which suggests the testthat package. Here's what the search path looks like after I load each of those packages: > library(devtools) > search() [1] ".GlobalEnv" "package:devtools" "package:stats" [4]

I agree that the utils package needs some improvements related to this, and hope to make them eventually. This type of feedback is very helpful. Thanks, Michael On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 1:42 AM, Jan G?recki <J.Gorecki at wit.edu.pl> wrote: > Dear Joris, > > So it does looks like the proposed function makes a lot sense then, isn't it? > > Cheers, > Jan > > On 16

On 18/09/2018 2:16 PM, Marcel Ramos wrote: > Dear R-devs, > > > Scenario: > > When checking a package via `R CMD check package_tar.ball`, required / suggested packages may be missing. R subsequently returns a list of packages that are missing (delimited by spaces). > > Example: > > ``` > R CMD check glmSparseNet_0.99.13.tar.gz > * using log directory

On 04/04/2016 1:35 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > On 4 April 2016 at 07:25, Hadley Wickham wrote: > | On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Jan G?recki <J.Gorecki at wit.edu.pl> wrote: > | > | In principle, I believe a package should pass R CMD check if no > | suggested packages are installed. However, since this is not currently > > The relevant manual says > >

Dear Jan, It is unavoidable to have OS and R dependencies for devtools. The building process for packages is both OS and R dependent, so devtools has to be too according to my understanding. Cheers Joris On 14 Jun 2016 18:56, "Jan G?recki" <J.Gorecki at wit.edu.pl> wrote: Hi Thierry, I'm perfectly aware of it. Any idea when devtools would be shipped as a base R package, or

I am trying to learn how to run the unit tests in the stringr package and have the following questions. 1) The r-cran-stringr package does not suggest/depend on the r-cran-testthat package . Would it make sense to add such a thing since after all the tests in /usr/lib/R/site-library/stringr/tests rely on testthat package? 2) I am getting the following error when trying to run the unit tests %

Dear Jan, Similar functionality is available in devtools::dev_package_deps() Best regards, ir. Thierry Onkelinx Instituut voor natuur- en bosonderzoek / Research Institute for Nature and Forest team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / team Biometrics & Quality Assurance Kliniekstraat 25 1070 Anderlecht Belgium To call in the statistician after the experiment is done may be no more than asking

Dear all, It looks like I do not grasp the concept of masked functions enough as to solve this trivial problem. The code that replicates the problem (a source code tree that realizes a R package actually) is under github so one can call it clone it easily from the command line (though more experienced users will spot the problem by browsing through the package code): git clone http://jcborras at

Hi, I notice in R-3.1.1, if a package specifies a VignetteBuilder (such as knitr) in its DESCRIPTION file, but does not also depend on the specified package (in either Depends, Imports, or Suggests), that R CMD check will say: * checking package dependencies ... ERROR VignetteBuilder package not declared: ?knitr? I'm glad this situation is now caught by R CMD check, but I think the message

I could do this...and I have before. This brings up a more fundamental question though. You're asking me to write code that changes the logic of the installation process (i.e. writing my own package installer). Instead of doing that, I would rather integrate that logic into R itself to improve the baseline installation process. This api proposal change would be additive and would not break

Just an observation/FYI on the new DESCRIPTION field 'VignetteBuilder' available in R devel: Unlike other package fields (Depends, Imports and Suggests), VignetteBuilder does not support version specifiers, e.g. VignetteBuilder: R.rsp (>= 0.8.2) but only VignetteBuilder: R.rsp If adding a version specifier, 'R CMD build' complaints with an: ** installing vignettes Error in