Re: [R-pkg-devel] Convention or standards for using header library (e.g. Eigen)

2023-06-23 Thread Simon Urbanek
Stephen, If you want to give the system version a shot, I would simply look for pkg-config, add the supplied CPPFLAGS to the package R flags if present and then test (regardless of pkg-config) with AC_CHECK_HEADER (see standard R-exts autoconf rules for packages). If that fails then use your in

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about missing package ‘emmeans’ on macos-x86_64

2023-06-23 Thread Simon Urbanek
> On Jun 24, 2023, at 12:19 AM, Uwe Ligges > wrote: > > > > On 23.06.2023 11:27, Helmut Schütz wrote: >> Dear all, >> since a while (January?) we face NOTEs in package checks >> (https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_PowerTOST.html): >> Version: 1.5-4 >> Check: package depend

Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE about missing package ‘emmeans’ on macos-x86_64

2023-06-23 Thread Uwe Ligges
On 23.06.2023 11:27, Helmut Schütz wrote: Dear all, since a while (January?) we face NOTEs in package checks (https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_PowerTOST.html): Version: 1.5-4 Check: package dependencies Result: NOTE     Package suggested but not available for checking: ‘

[R-pkg-devel] Convention or standards for using header library (e.g. Eigen)

2023-06-23 Thread Stephen Wade
I recently submitted a package to CRAN which downloaded Eigen via Makevars and Makevars.win. My Makevars.ucrt was empty as I noted that Eigen3 is installed by default (however, this doesn't ensure that a version of Eigen compatible/tested with the package is available). The source is currently on

[R-pkg-devel] NOTE about missing package ‘emmeans’ on macos-x86_64

2023-06-23 Thread Helmut Schütz
Dear all, since a while (January?) we face NOTEs in package checks (https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_PowerTOST.html): Version: 1.5-4 Check: package dependencies Result: NOTE     Package suggested but not available for checking: ‘emmeans’ Flavor: r-release-macos-x86_64 Version

[R-pkg-devel] Fw: Guidance on splitting up an R package?

2023-06-23 Thread Rolf Turner
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 02:35:23 + Bernd.Gruber wrote: > I have a question regarding the separation of a package into smaller > pieces (to avoid long testing/installation times and more important > to avoid to many dependencies) Here is some advice that was sent out in response to a similar

Re: [R-pkg-devel] Questions regarding a new (seperated package) and how to submit them to cran

2023-06-23 Thread Thierry Onkelinx
Dear Bernd, You could contact the maintainer of the spatstat package. They did the same thing (splitting a large package into several smaller ones) a few years ago. Having the base package suggesting an add-on and the add-on depending on or suggesting the base package might create an unwanted loo