From andy_liaw at merck.com  Sat Nov  6 18:38:09 2004
From: andy_liaw at merck.com (Liaw, Andy)
Date: Sat Nov  6 18:46:22 2004
Subject: [Rd] install/build/build --binary
Message-ID: <3A822319EB35174CA3714066D590DCD50994E290@usrymx25.merck.com>

> From: Gabor Grothendieck
> 
> I have question regarding package installation.
> 
> What is the difference between check, INSTALL, build and 
> build --binary, which imply which and what order does one
> normally perform them?  I have been trying:
> 
> R CMD build /mypackage
> R CMD check /mypackage
> R CMD build --binary /mypackage
> 
> in that order but wanted to check that this is right. 

Here's my understanding:

R CMD build and R CMD check are nearly orthogonal.  R CMD build simply
create the .tar.gz using the version info in the DESCRIPTION file.  The only
part that's not orthogonal between the two (at least on Windows) is that R
CMD build --binary first install the package in a temporary directory and
then zip it up.

I would do:

1. R CMD INSTALL -l testdir mypkg, and start R, load the package and try it
out a bit.

2. R CMD check mypkg.  Make corrections as needed.

3. R CMD build mypkg (or add the --binary flag) for distribution.

I believe R-exts has some explanations.

HTH,
Andy
 
> Also, what portion of the check process can be run right from R rather
> than from a script and assuming my package is in /mypackage and its
> subdirectories what R command(s) from tools do I issue?  It occurs to
> me that if I do it from R rather than from scripts I could turn on
> debugging on the relevant tools command and more easily find out
> what they are checking when things go bad to help me track down
> my problems.
> 
> I am using Windows XP and R 2.0.1beta .
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> 
>


[Rd] install/build/build --binary
Liaw, Andy