>> In the code for install.packages, I see that if Ncpus>1, it passes the >> Ncpus to make, as in 'make -k -j 32'. Is it possible that these >> packages are failing because of this option to make? > > > It is perfectly correct option: please do your homework before posting as the > posting guide asked of you.
The question isn't about whether these are valid make options. I realize that '-j <n>' is a valid option for make, just like Ncpus is a valid option for install.packages. The question is whether that option is unexpectedly resulting in failed compiles for some packages. >> >> Has anyone else run into this issue before? > > > Yes. It is due to missing dependencies between packages. I find this works > well on CRAN *provided* that the BioC repositories are also selected so that > dependencies can be traced via BioC dependencies. However, BioC does have a > fair few missing dependencies in its packages (run R CMD check over BioC to > see them). > > Take a look at the logs of the failed packages. One I see frequently is that > ddgraph fails because it depends indirectly on RBGL which takes a long time > to install and is still being done. Thanks, I'll take a closer look at these those cross dependencies. -Winston ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
