Hi,
What is the usual process to submit a new package to CRAN which has
false-positive warnings?
I submitted rtree_0.2.0 last week (7/21). This package compiles with warnings
from Boost headers. The warnings are expected, unavoidable, and unimportant,
which I documented in cran-comments.md. Af
Hi Folks,
It appears that c++17 is not supported on all platforms used by CRAN. Is
there a workaround?
I have CXX_STD = CXX17 in the package Makevars file, but see
https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_kdtools.html
I assume if CXX17 is not defined, it is not available on that build
Dear Kent
I think the canonical way to report these is in the space on the
submission form, unless I have not correctly grasped what you did.
Michael
On 26/07/2021 16:02, Kent Johnson wrote:
Hi,
What is the usual process to submit a new package to CRAN which has
false-positive warnings?
I
Thanks Michael! So I should re-submit the package with the documentation on
WARNINGS in the comments section of the submission?
Kent
From: Michael Dewey
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 12:07 PM
To: Kent Johnson ; r-package-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-pkg-d
Actually I think the contents of cran-comments.md were included in the comments
on the submission form. I used devtools::submit_cran() for the submission. It
automates the form submission and IIUC copies cran-comments into the form. My
comments are in the confirmation email I received.
Kent
___
On 26/07/2021 11:02 a.m., Kent Johnson wrote:
Hi,
What is the usual process to submit a new package to CRAN which has
false-positive warnings?
I submitted rtree_0.2.0 last week (7/21). This package compiles with warnings
from Boost headers. The warnings are expected, unavoidable, and unimport
Thanks, Duncan,
I did consult with Dirk about the warnings. The #pragma in Boost headers which
disables those warnings is not allowed in a CRAN submission, so he removed the
#pragma, enabling the warnings.
I see that Boost does call std::abort in its error handling. I don't think I
can do anyt
FWIW my package 'secr' has for some time had the same 'abort', 'exit' or
'printf' issue when checked locally on Windows. It is happily accepted by CRAN,
and I have learned to ignore the local message. The only common element I can
see between secr 4.4.5 and rtree 0.2.0 is that both import and li
On 26/07/2021 3:34 p.m., Kent Johnson wrote:
Thanks, Duncan,
I did consult with Dirk about the warnings. The #pragma in Boost headers
which disables those warnings is not allowed in a CRAN submission, so he
removed the #pragma, enabling the warnings >
I see that Boost does call std::abort in i
The {anytime} package by Dirk Eddelbuettel uses {BH} and generates the same
NOTE when I CMD Check it locally on Windows. It seems safe to ignore this NOTE.
Kent
From: Duncan Murdoch
If you look at the BH page on CRAN, there are a ton of "reverse linking
to" pac
On 26/07/2021 4:43 p.m., Kent Johnson wrote:
The {anytime} package by Dirk Eddelbuettel uses {BH} and generates the
same NOTE when I CMD Check it locally on Windows. It seems safe to
ignore this NOTE.
But it generates no messages on CRAN: OK all the way.
Duncan Murdoch
Kent
-
11 matches
Mail list logo
