From ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de  Sat Sep  5 17:03:31 2009
From: ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de (Uwe Ligges)
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 17:03:31 +0200
Subject: [Rd] Dependencies of  packages' CHECK....
In-Reply-To: <44wpfocpqa66p.fsf@crepe.osg.ufl.edu>
References: <44wpf1vmp6dnn.fsf@crepe.osg.ufl.edu>	<4059DBC9-C918-4D26-956E-C6627A1BB079@r-project.org>
	<44wpfocpqa66p.fsf@crepe.osg.ufl.edu>
Message-ID: <4AA27DC3.7050500@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>



Allen S. Rout wrote:
> 
>> On Sep 2, 2009, at 2:53 , Allen S. Rout wrote:
>>
>>> I'm working to automate the building of RPM packages for CRAN &c.
>>> In the process, I'm trying to get a sense of the correct
>>> dependencies.
>>>
>>> [...] 
>>>
>>> In other words, to check properly, I need to treat Suggests and
>>> Imports as Depends.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> So: does this seem silly, or is that just The Way It is?
> 
> 
> Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> writes:
> 
>> Yes, it is the way it is says the Windows binary package maintainer.
> 
> Simon Urbanek <simon.urbanek at r-project.org> writes:
> 
>> [ ... Yep ... ] 
> 
> 
> OK, thanks.  Clear is good. :) There followed some offline discussion
> with Simon, in which he patiently relieved me of some measure of
> ignorance.
> 
> I'm chewing on this so hard because I want to do things The Right Way.
> Here's the Most Right I've gotten so far; Please correct and/or throw
> vegetables as indicated.
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Express binary package dependencies according to Depends and Imports.
>    I'll call this the 'narrow dependency graph'. 


1, 3-5 sound fine, but I do not see why you need 2).

Best wishes,
Uwe Ligges



> 2) As part of the binary package build process, run CHECK
>    with R_CHECK_FORCE_SUGGESTS = false. 
> 
> I'll pull nomenclature out of my ear and call these "built" but not
> "checked".
 >
> 3) Build all binary packages which are downstream according to all of
>    Depends, Imports, Suggests, and Extends.  I'll call this the 'broad
>    dependency graph'.
> 
> 4) Install all the packages in the broad dependency graph.
> 
> 5) for each package in the broad graph, run CHECK with
>    R_CHECK_FORCE_SUGGESTS=true.
> 
> Then the affected packages are "checked".  Perhaps this can be noted
> with a signature.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to get at least to "Well, that doesn't sound too stupid"
> before I turn around trying to sell that evolution to the RPM-flavored
> list. :)
> 
> 
> 
> - Allen S. Rout
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel



[Rd] Dependencies of packages' CHECK....
Uwe Ligges