[R-pkg-devel] CRAN Pre-Test Problems -- FSA Package

2018-04-04 Thread Derek Ogle
I recently submitted a new version (v0.8.19) of my FSA package to CRAN. It was 
rejected at the pre-test level because of problems with automatic checks. There 
were three links for me to see what these problems were.

The first link from CRAN was to a win-builder check log 
(https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/FSA_0.8.19_20180403_023758/Windows/00check.log)
 that contained the single following warning:

* checking Rd cross-references ... WARNING
package 'DescTools' exists but was not installed under R >= 2.10.0 so xrefs 
cannot be checked

This is related to a cross-reference link in my documentation. Should I just 
remove this link (this link did not cause problems when I had submitted my 
package previously)?

The second link from CRAN was to my current (v0.8.17) package on CRAN 
(https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_FSA.html). This shows 
several warnings related to a function in a dependent package (car) being 
deprecated. The new version of my package (the one I am trying to submit to 
CRAN) is meant to address these issues. As far as I can tell, through checks on 
my local machine, on win-builder, appVeyor, and Travis-Ci, these issues have 
been addressed. I don't know how to address this pre-test issue, except to 
submit the new version of my package. [Note there is another warning on this 
page related to the RMark package. That warning has existed for many versions 
of my package and has been ignored by CRAN in the past.]

The third link from CRAN 
(https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/FSA_0.8.19_20180403_023758/Windows/)
 was to the same set of win-builder results which only shows the same warning 
as the first link above.

I did reply to the CRAN submission with this same set of questions but have not 
yet received a reply. [This is not a critique, just pointing out what I have 
done.]

Any suggestions for how to handle these issues to satisfy the pre-test (and 
other tests) of CRAN?

Thank you for any advice.

[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel


[R-pkg-devel] Fwd: [CRAN-pretest-archived] CRAN submission Boom 0.8

2018-04-04 Thread Steven Scott
I've been trying to update the Boom package to the next version, and it
hasn't been going so well.  Hoping someone can help me figure out what next
steps I should take.

I got the attached mail from auto-check.  From what I can tell the new
version of Boom (0.8.0) has two issues.  Some long path names, and a large
install size.  Both are pre-existing issues shared with previous Boom
versions.  Nothing can be done about the long path names (but they have
never caused a problem in the past), and the large install size has to do
with the -g flag passed by R CMD INSTALL, which I don't control.  In past
versions of Boom we've let both these issues go.

The auto-check script also flags an ERROR which seems to be related to
version 0.7.0 (the current version).  Clicking through to the compiler
errors (
https://www.r-project.org/nosvn/R.check/r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-clang/Boom-00install.html)
gives:

* installing to library
‘/home/hornik/tmp/R.check/r-devel-clang/Work/build/Packages’
* installing *source* package ‘Boom’ ...
** package ‘Boom’ successfully unpacked and MD5 sums checked
** libs
make[1]: Entering directory '/tmp/Rtmpnqufqi/R.INSTALL4d314a0b9495/Boom/src'
clang++-6.0  -I"/home/hornik/tmp/R.check/r-devel-clang/Work/build/include"
-DNDEBUG -I. -I../inst/include -IBmath -Imath/cephes
-DNO_BOOST_THREADS -DNO_BOOST_FILESYSTEM -DADD_ -DRLANGUAGE
-I"/home/hornik/tmp/R.check/r-devel-clang/Work/build/Packages/BH/include"
-I/usr/local/include   -fpic  -g -O3 -Wall -pedantic -mtune=native -c
Models/Bart/PoissonBartModel.cpp -o Models/Bart/PoissonBartModel.o
In file included from Models/Bart/PoissonBartModel.cpp:19:
In file included from ../inst/include/Models/Bart/PoissonBartModel.hpp:24:
In file included from ../inst/include/Models/Bart/Bart.hpp:22:
In file included from
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/set:60:
In file included from
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_tree.h:65:
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:545:9:
error: redefinition of '__not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up>'
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up> : __not_overloaded2<_Tp, _Up> { };
   ^~
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:531:9:
note: previous definition is here
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up, __void_t<
   ^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:608:9:
error: redefinition of '__not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up>'
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up> : __not_overloaded2<_Tp, _Up> { };
   ^~
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:594:9:
note: previous definition is here
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up, __void_t<
   ^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:671:9:
error: redefinition of '__not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up>'
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up> : __not_overloaded2<_Tp, _Up> { };
   ^~
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:657:9:
note: previous definition is here
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up, __void_t<
   ^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:734:9:
error: redefinition of '__not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up>'
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up> : __not_overloaded2<_Tp, _Up> { };
   ^~
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8.0.1/../../../../include/c++/8.0.1/bits/stl_function.h:720:9:
note: previous definition is here
struct __not_overloaded<_Tp, _Up, __void_t<
   ^
4 errors generated.
/home/hornik/tmp/R.check/r-devel-clang/Work/build/etc/Makeconf:166:
recipe for target 'Models/Bart/PoissonBartModel.o' failed
make[1]: *** [Models/Bart/PoissonBartModel.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/tmp/Rtmpnqufqi/R.INSTALL4d314a0b9495/Boom/src'
ERROR: compilation failed for package ‘Boom’
* removing ‘/home/hornik/tmp/R.check/r-devel-clang/Work/build/Packages/Boom’

These appear to be caused by an ill formed std::set or std::function in the
STL implementation of the host machine.  If I'm reading that wrong someone
please let me know.

Thanks!
S

-- Forwarded message --
From: 
Date: Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 1:21 PM
Subject: [CRAN-pretest-archived] CRAN submission Boom 0.8
To: steve.the.bayes...@gmail.com
Cc: cran-submissi...@r-project.org


Dear maintainer,

package Boom_0.8.tar.gz does not pass the incoming checks automatically,
please see the following pre-tests:
Windows: 
Status: 4 NOTEs
Debian: 

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Fwd: [CRAN-pretest-archived] CRAN submission Boom 0.8

2018-04-04 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel

On 4 April 2018 at 14:15, Steven Scott wrote:
| These appear to be caused by an ill formed std::set or std::function in the
| STL implementation of the host machine.  If I'm reading that wrong someone
| please let me know.

AFAICT it needs C++11 explicitly set which that machine (with a new clang-6.0
installation) did not provide by default.  This has bitten a few other
compilations lately as well but should get sorted out in due course.

Dirk

-- 
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org

__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel


Re: [R-pkg-devel] Fwd: [CRAN-pretest-archived] CRAN submission Boom 0.8

2018-04-04 Thread Steven Scott
Thanks Dirk.  IMO the package is in good shape otherwise.  I'll wait hear
from the CRAN maintainers.
S

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel  wrote:

>
> On 4 April 2018 at 14:15, Steven Scott wrote:
> | These appear to be caused by an ill formed std::set or std::function in
> the
> | STL implementation of the host machine.  If I'm reading that wrong
> someone
> | please let me know.
>
> AFAICT it needs C++11 explicitly set which that machine (with a new
> clang-6.0
> installation) did not provide by default.  This has bitten a few other
> compilations lately as well but should get sorted out in due course.
>
> Dirk
>
> --
> http://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