Dirk, To clarify the reference to zero cost. If Murray is being told that total time is thirteen minutes and that the time needs to be less than ten, he might try to reduce the cost of tests and examples, but they don't in total add up to the required three minutes. Even if the combined cost of tests and examples is reduced to zero he is still not below ten minutes.
Greg On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 at 22:47, Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> wrote: > > Greg, > > On 3 June 2025 at 21:22, Greg Hunt wrote: > | Dirk, > | Even if he gets the test and example times to zero, his total time in > that > | thirteen minute run is still above ten minutes. In my view the > incomplete time > | reporting (we don't know what makes up the thirteen minutes) is a bug in > the > | build process. > > Are you aware of these (documented, if you know where to look) environment > variables? (Copied from my ~/.R/check.Renviron, and 2 mins may be too > tight.) > > _R_CHECK_INSTALL_TIMING_CPU_TO_ELAPSED_THRESHOLD_=2 > _R_CHECK_TIMINGS_=2 > _R_CHECK_EXAMPLE_TIMING_CPU_TO_ELAPSED_THRESHOLD_=2 > _R_CHECK_TEST_TIMING_CPU_TO_ELAPSED_THRESHOLD_=2 > > Also, I am lost between your dualing propositions 'test and example times > [are] zero' and 'still above ten minutes'. Can you re-explain? Generally > zero > is in effect less than 10. So I must be misunderstanding something. > > Dirk > > | > | Greg > | > | On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 at 10:54, Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> wrote: > | > | > | On 3 June 2025 at 00:12, Murray Efford via R-package-devel wrote: > | | My revision of package 'secr' fails CRAN pre-test on Windows (R > 4.5.0) > | because total check time exceeds 10 min (it's 760 seconds or 13 > min). I > | can't see how to fix this as none of the times listed in the log > https:// > | > win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/secr_5.2.2_20250602_054847/ > | Windows/00check.log seems exceptional: > | | * checking CRAN incoming feasibility ... [18s] OK > | | * checking R code for possible problems ... [116s] OK > | | * checking examples ... [87s] OK > | | * checking tests ... [59s] OK > | | * checking re-building of vignette outputs ... [42s] OK > | | * checking PDF version of manual ... [32s] OK > | | * checking HTML version of manual ... [42s] OK > | | and the total of these components is only 396 sec (6.6 min), so I > must be > | missing something. I would appreciate any advice. Not much was > added in > | this release, and I don't like the idea of blindly hacking off bits. > | > | To a first approximation every tests is a function of some variable > we can > | describe as 'N' which you, as author of the package and the tests, > | understand > | best. > | > | Surely you must know a way to define a new N1 <- N/2, or some other > | appropriate scaling. Then try running with N1 instead. And you can > also > | make > | both tests and examples _conditional_ on some other control variable. > | > | It's all just code. Bend it like Beckham. > | > | Dirk > | > | | > | | [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > | | > | | ______________________________________________ > | | R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list > | | https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel > | > | -- > | dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org > | > | ______________________________________________ > | R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list > | https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel > | > > -- > dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
