tl;dr: Repackaging in native formats dramatically improves user access to
packages.
>> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:23:51 +0100, Uwe Ligges
>> said:
> 1. You probably mean "Depends" rather than "Requires".
> 2. You forgot "LinkingTo"
Heh, thanks! I'll add them.
> All binary packages on CRAN ar
A working system exists at
http://debian.cran.r-project.org
with automated builds (ie automated resolutions of both built-time and
run-time dependencies) of over 2000 packages for both 64-bit Linux ("amd64")
and 32-bit Linux ("i386") of the Debian 'testing' distribution. Charles and
I
On 20.01.2010 20:11, Allen S. Rout wrote:
Ross Boylan writes:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:48 +, Benilton Carvalho wrote:
How about using:
Enhances: Rmpi
This unique local bestiary of dependencies is quite inconvenient for
anyone trying to connect R with any other system of package
mana
Ross Boylan writes:
> On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:48 +, Benilton Carvalho wrote:
>> How about using:
>>
>> Enhances: Rmpi
This unique local bestiary of dependencies is quite inconvenient for
anyone trying to connect R with any other system of package
management. Below, I've included the rath
On 16 January 2010 at 10:53, Ross Boylan wrote:
| On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 07:49 -0800, Seth Falcon wrote:
| > Package authors
| > should be responsible enough to test their codes with and without
| > optional features.
| It seems unlikely most package authors will have access to a full range
| of pl
On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 07:49 -0800, Seth Falcon wrote:
> Package authors
> should be responsible enough to test their codes with and without
> optional features.
It seems unlikely most package authors will have access to a full range
of platform types.
Ross
_
On 1/15/10 7:47 AM, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>
> On Jan 15, 2010, at 10:22 , Seth Falcon wrote:
>> I believe another option is:
>>
>> pkg <- "somePkg"
>> pkgAvail <- require(pkg, character.only = TRUE)
>> if (pkgAvail)
>> ...
>> else
>> ...
>>
>
> That is not an option - that is the
On 1/15/10 7:51 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
> the Windows checks for CRAN run with that setting, i.e.
>
> _R_CHECK_FORCE_SUGGESTS_=false
>
> Hence the multicore issue mentioned below actually does not exist.
I did not know that the Windows checks for CRAN used this setting.
My concern was initiated b
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 12:34 -0500, Simon Urbanek wrote:
>
> On Jan 15, 2010, at 12:18 , Ross Boylan wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 09:19 +0100, Kurt Hornik wrote:
> >> The idea is that maintainers typically want to
> >> fully check their functionality, suggesting to force suggests by
> >> def
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:48 +, Benilton Carvalho wrote:
> How about using:
>
> Enhances: Rmpi
>
> ?
>
> b
The main reason is that "enhances" seems a peculiar way to describe the
relation between a package that (optionally) uses a piece of
infrastructure and the infrastructure. Similarly, I
On Jan 15, 2010, at 12:18 , Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 09:19 +0100, Kurt Hornik wrote:
The idea is that maintainers typically want to
fully check their functionality, suggesting to force suggests by
default.
This might be the nub of the problem. There are different audiences,
e
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 09:19 +0100, Kurt Hornik wrote:
> The idea is that maintainers typically want to
> fully check their functionality, suggesting to force suggests by
> default.
This might be the nub of the problem. There are different audiences,
even for R CMD check.
The maintainer probably w
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010, Seth Falcon wrote:
There is a real need (of some kind) here. Not all packages work on all
platforms. For example, the multicore package provides a mechanism for
running parallel computations on a multi-cpu box, but it is not
available on Windows. A package that _is_ avai
On 15.01.2010 16:22, Seth Falcon wrote:
On 1/15/10 12:19 AM, Kurt Hornik wrote:
Jeff Ryan writes:
Hi Ross,
The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
trickery.
Take a look here (unless your name is
On Jan 15, 2010, at 10:22 , Seth Falcon wrote:
On 1/15/10 12:19 AM, Kurt Hornik wrote:
Jeff Ryan writes:
Hi Ross,
The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
trickery.
Take a look here (unless your n
On 1/15/10 12:19 AM, Kurt Hornik wrote:
>> Jeff Ryan writes:
>
>> Hi Ross,
>> The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
>> contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
>> trickery.
>
>> Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
I believe
How about using:
Enhances: Rmpi
?
b
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:00 AM, Ross Boylan wrote:
> I have a package that can use rmpi, but works fine without it. None of
> the automatic test code invokes rmpi functionality. (One test file
> illustrates how to use it, but has quit() as its first comma
> Jeff Ryan writes:
> Hi Ross,
> The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
> contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
> trickery.
> Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
But Kurt will we happy to tell you that you can turn off "fo
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 00:12 -0600, Jeff Ryan wrote:
> Hi Ross,
>
> The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
> contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
> trickery.
>
> Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
>
> http://r-forge.r-project
Hi Ross,
The quantmod package makes available routines from a variety of
contributed packages, but gets around your issues with a bit of, um,
trickery.
Take a look here (unless your name is Kurt ;-) ):
http://r-forge.r-project.org/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/pkg/R/buildModel.methods.R?rev=367&roo
20 matches
Mail list logo
