From bbolker @ending from gm@il@com  Mon Nov 26 23:42:48 2018
From: bbolker @ending from gm@il@com (Ben Bolker)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 17:42:48 -0500
Subject: [Rd] issue with testInstalledPackage
In-Reply-To: <bb6fa2$aha9ur@ironport10.mayo.edu>
References: <bb6fa2$aha9ur@ironport10.mayo.edu>
Message-ID: <375cf518-49dd-d19f-e94d-0afa24850115@gmail.com>


  FWIW I've been reasonably happy with the revdepcheck package: it's not
base-R, but it's pretty robust (lme4 'only' has 286 dependencies to
check ...)  I've had much better luck running it on a remote server
(where the sysadmin is responsive so it's not too much trouble to get
extra system dependencies/Debian packages installed as they become
necessary).

On 2018-11-26 3:42 p.m., Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel wrote:
> Background: I run tools::testInstalledPackage on all packages that dependend on survival 
> (605 as of today) before sending a new release to CRAN. It has a few false positives which 
> I then follow up on.? (Mostly packages with as-yet-incomplete tests in their inst directory).
> 
>  ?Issue: testInstalledPackage("mets")? generates an? "Error in checkVignettes(pkg, 
> lib.loc, latex = FALSE, weave = TRUE)" message, which stops my script.? The source code 
> for that package passes R CMD check.
> I can easily work around this in the short term by adding mets to my do-not-check list.
> 
> Footnote: the newer "check_packages_in_dir" routine doesn't work for me.?? The biggest 
> reason is that it doesn't have a way to give a list of packages to skip.? My little 
> desktop box doesn't have every linux library (cryptography, geospatial, etc.), nor do I 
> load up bioconductor; which leads to a boatload of false positives.? I keep adding things 
> but the packages add faster.
> 
> Terry T.
> 
> 
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>



[Rd] issue with testInstalledPackage
Ben Bolker