Sorry, it was a mistake. CC the list.
于 2019年7月2日 GMT-07:00 上午12:17:01, Jeff Newmiller <jdnew...@dcn.davis.ca.us> 写到:
>I recommend that you "reply-all" to keep the mailing list included.
>
>
>On July 1, 2019 11:30:23 PM PDT, Jialin Ma <marl...@gmx.cn> wrote:
>>Hi Jeff,
>>
>>Thanks for your reply. I would like to clarify a little bit:
>>
>>> A) You cannot assume the package code will have write access to the
>>library
>>> directories. The user/admin who installs the package may never load
>>the
>>> package.
>>
>>I am downloading the necessary binary dependencies at *compile time*,
>>i.e. the
>>script is being called inside "Makevars.win". I suppose the script
>>should have
>>write access to the current directory, i.e. "inst" directory, at this
>>stage?
>>But I am not sure about it.
>>
>>I am aware many packages will download static libraries on windows at
>>this
>>stage. For example the Cairo package (see
>>https://github.com/cran/Cairo/blob/
>>master/configure.win ) mentioned in Writing R Extensions will download
>>binary
>>to the source directory and link against them.
>>My question is about whether it is an accepted practice to put DLL
>file
>>in
>>"inst/libs".
>>
>>> B) Downloading binary files for execution without the direct
>>involvement of
>>> the user/admin is a security risk.
>>>
>>> C) Open-source package license means the source code is part of the
>>package.
>>> Downloading binaries later fails this requirement.
>>
>>This however is a workaround for the windows platform due to the
>>difficulties
>>compiling the external libraries. The toolchains needed (specifically,
>>cmake)
>>was missing in Rtools and there are several dependencies. I believe
>>there
>>should be some accepted practice for the license issue, however I am
>>not sure.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Jialin
>>
>>
>>On Monday, July 1, 2019 10:49:43 PM PDT you wrote:
>>> A) You cannot assume the package code will have write access to the
>>library
>>> directories. The user/admin who installs the package may never load
>>the
>>> package.
>>>
>>> B) Downloading binary files for execution without the direct
>>involvement of
>>> the user/admin is a security risk.
>>>
>>> C) Open-source package license means the source code is part of the
>>package.
>>> Downloading binaries later fails this requirement.
>>> On July 1, 2019 10:03:07 PM PDT, Jialin Ma <marl...@gmx.cn> wrote:
>>> >Hi everyone,
>>> >
>>> >Currently my package has a script downloading additional DLLs
>>> >into "inst/libs" and being called in "Makevars.win". In this way
>>these
>>> >DLLs get copied to libs when installing the package and I am able
>to
>>> >load them with "library.dynam".
>>> >
>>> >However R CMD check gives the following warning.
>>> >
>>> > * checking package subdirectories ... WARNING
>>> >
>>> > Found the following non-empty subdirectories of 'inst' also used
>by
>>R:
>>> > inst/libs
>>> >
>>> > It is recommended not to interfere with package subdirectories
>used
>>by
>>> >
>>> > R.
>>> >
>>> >I was wondering what would be the best practice for my case, or I
>am
>>> >safe
>>> >to ignore this warning (suppose I am planing for a CRAN
>submission).
>>> >
>>> >I know many packages will download static library and link them at
>>> >compile
>>> >time. But I haven't see any example with additional DLL files.
>>> >
>>> >Thanks.
>>> >Jialin Ma
>>> >
>>> >______________________________________________
>>> >R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>>> >https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>
>--
>Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
