Re: [Rd] running 'make' failed during vignette creation ('R CMD build') on Windows

2010-09-16 Thread Hervé Pagès
I think I found the problem. During the recent transition from Perl-based to R-based 'R CMD check/build', the rcmdfn() function in src/gnuwin32/front-ends/rcmdfn.c has been hacked quite a bit. This function gets called right after the R front-end is started and its main purpose is to process the

[Rd] improvements to plm fitting

2010-09-16 Thread Kyle Matoba
In the course of some work I have been doing for Revolution Analytics I have had the necessity of modifying the plm function so that it would not die halfway through fitting. In particular, I was able to more than halve the runtime (for my particular run) and improve its memory usage with three

[Rd] package test failed on Solaris x86 -- help needed for debugging

2010-09-16 Thread Thomas Petzoldt
Dear R developers, we have currently a 'mysterious' test problem with one package that successfully passed the tests on all platforms, with the only exception of Solaris x86 where obviously one of our help examples breaks the CRAN test. As we don't own such a machine I want to ask about a

[Rd] [2.11.1] Cross build for Win: psignal.h No such file or directory

2010-09-16 Thread Łukasz Ręcławowicz
Hi, I'm trying to build R with Radford Neal's patches. I did successful before on Win, but with 2.11.1 version i got some problems. So my next try was cross build on Linux. (without patches, yet) I use: ./configure --build i686-pc-linux-gnu --host i686-pc-mingw32 --with-x=no And get: configure:

[Rd] advice on writing/maintaining an R package with a version control system

2010-09-16 Thread Vinh Nguyen
Dear all, As I resume my dissertation work next month, I'd like to actually start an R package this time around. I haven't done so because I update my code very often (still in development phase), so running the skeleton function, running checks, building, and re-installing the package onto the

Re: [Rd] package test failed on Solaris x86 -- help needed for debugging

2010-09-16 Thread Martyn Plummer
Dear Thomas, Is this the deSolve package? http://www.r-project.org/nosvn/R.check/r-patched-solaris-x86/deSolve-00check.html I can help you with that. It does pass R CMD check on my OpenSolaris installation, but I am getting some compiler warnings. I will send you details. Martyn On Thu,

Re: [Rd] advice on writing/maintaining an R package with a version control system

2010-09-16 Thread Simon Urbanek
On Sep 16, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Vinh Nguyen wrote: Dear all, As I resume my dissertation work next month, I'd like to actually start an R package this time around. I haven't done so because I update my code very often (still in development phase), so running the skeleton function, running

Re: [Rd] package test failed on Solaris x86 -- help needed for debugging

2010-09-16 Thread Thomas Petzoldt
On 16.09.2010 17:05, Martyn Plummer wrote: Dear Thomas, Is this the deSolve package? http://www.r-project.org/nosvn/R.check/r-patched-solaris-x86/deSolve-00check.html I can help you with that. It does pass R CMD check on my OpenSolaris installation, but I am getting some compiler warnings. I

[Rd] Possible bug or annoyance with library.dynam.unload()

2010-09-16 Thread Karl Forner
Hello, I have a package with a namespace. Because I use Roxygen that overwrites the NAMESPACE file each time it is run, I use a R/zzz.R file with an .onLoad() and .onUnload() functions to take care of loading and unloading my shared library. The problem: if I load my library from a local

Re: [Rd] advice on writing/maintaining an R package with a version control system

2010-09-16 Thread Whit Armstrong
Since you are using git you may want to consider a submodule for your project. It is often helpful to build a full library in c++ complete with it's own unit tests. You can then package this library inside of your R project as a submodule. This can speed up the testing phase of the project b/c

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Janko Thyson
From: Uwe Ligges ligges_at_statistik.tu-dortmund.de Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:23:01 +0200 On 29.08.2010 22:34, Kyle Matoba wrote: All, I just finished the process of build a package for the first time and found it characteristically (for R) very straightforward and well documented.

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Uwe Ligges
On 16.09.2010 20:18, Janko Thyson wrote: From: Uwe Liggesligges_at_statistik.tu-dortmund.de Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:23:01 +0200 On 29.08.2010 22:34, Kyle Matoba wrote: All, I just finished the process of build a package for the first time and found it characteristically (for R) very

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread William Dunlap
From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Janko Thyson Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 11:19 AM To: r-de...@r-project. org Subject: Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages ... Dear Uwe, in principle, I totally

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Duncan Murdoch
On 16/09/2010 2:43 PM, Uwe Ligges wrote: On 16.09.2010 20:18, Janko Thyson wrote: From: Uwe Liggesligges_at_statistik.tu-dortmund.de Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:23:01 +0200 On 29.08.2010 22:34, Kyle Matoba wrote: All, I just finished the process of build a package for the first time

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Janko Thyson
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: William Dunlap [mailto:wdun...@tibco.com] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. September 2010 20:45 An: Janko Thyson; r-de...@r-project. org Betreff: RE: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Janko Thyson
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Duncan Murdoch [mailto:murdoch.dun...@gmail.com] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. September 2010 20:55 An: Uwe Ligges Cc: Janko Thyson; r-de...@r-project. org Betreff: Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages On 16/09/2010 2:43

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Duncan Murdoch
On 16/09/2010 2:45 PM, William Dunlap wrote: From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Janko Thyson Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 11:19 AM To: r-de...@r-project. org Subject: Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Kevin R. Coombes
The phrase that caught my attention in your post is the one about running package.skeleton() over and over. When I'm developing packages, I never run it more than once. And I usually delete a lot of the files it produces (since I like to organize my functions in logical batches and not in

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Kasper Daniel Hansen
I agree with Kevin, I never run package.skeleton more than once. But one advantage to running it over and over again is if you change the names or the ordering of function arguments. That gets autowritten and I could see that being convenient if you change those a lot (as you sometime do in

[Rd] environment variable for tar()/untar()

2010-09-16 Thread Hervé Pagès
Hi, Is there any reason why tar() and untar() don't use the same environment variable? Usage: tar(tarfile, files = NULL, compression = c(none, gzip, bzip2, xz), compression_level = 6, tar = Sys.getenv(tar)) Usage: untar(tarfile, files = NULL, list = FALSE, exdir =

[Rd] S4 plot generic documentation

2010-09-16 Thread Seb
Hi, Say we want to supply a generic plot() in a package with a simple class, like this: ---cut here---start-- setClass(track, representation=representation(x=numeric, y=numeric)) if (!isGeneric(plot)) { setGeneric(plot,

Re: [Rd] a small suggestion for improving the building of packages

2010-09-16 Thread Mark.Bravington
FWIW, the package-building tools in the 'mvbutils' package-- see ?mvbutils.packaging.tools-- are supposed to alleviate much of this (provided of course you are willing to sign up to MY view of the universe...). Building a legal package out of existing code from scratch takes me less than 5