Louis,
you didn't provide any details (please always post a link to the sources you're
talking about!), but I suspect you are missing character length arguments,
Lapack.h has:
F77_NAME(dgeevx)(const char* balanc, const char* jobvl, const char* jobvr,
const char* sense, const int* n, double* a, const int* lda,
double* wr, double* wi, double* vl, const int* ldvl,
double* vr, const int* ldvr, int* ilo, int* ihi,
double* scale, double* abnrm, double* rconde, double* rcondv,
double* work, const int* lwork, int* iwork, int* info
FCLEN FCLEN FCLEN FCLEN);
23 = without lengths, 27 = with lengths, so presumably the R in question is
compiled with USE_FC_LEN_T and thus your call is missing the corresponding
FCONE entries - see R-ext 6.6.1 Fortran character strings.
Cheers,
Simon
> On 29/11/2022, at 12:36 PM, ASLETT, LOUIS J.M. <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> I submitted a package update to CRAN in the hopes of reinstating an archived
> package, {PhaseType}. The update is mostly to remove a dependency on another
> archived package, and to add registrations of C functions.
>
> Everything is fine on r-release, but on r-devel I have errors. I tested this
> with r-hub prior to submission, but wondered if there were issues there
> because the errors didn't make any sense, so I (perhaps wrongly) submitted to
> CRAN and the errors have been repeated but again *only* for r-devel.
>
> The full error log (so long as it lasts) is here:
> https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/PhaseType_0.2.0_20221124_233702/
>
> Essentially, the compile errors exclusively relate to LAPACK functions which
> should be completely stable. As far as I can tell (welcome any correction)
> the r-devel build is expecting a different number of arguments for these
> LAPACK functions than r-release, which honestly baffles me.
>
> For example, I note the error:
>
> #> PHT_MCMC_Aslett.c:180:157: error: too few arguments to function call,
> expected 27, have 23
> #> F77_CALL(dgeevx)(&balanc, &jobvl, &jobvr, &sense, n, NULL, n, NULL, NULL,
> NULL, n, NULL, n, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, &work, &lwork, NULL,
> &info);
> 1721
>
> However, the standard LAPACK interface documentation for dgeevx (see eg
> https://netlib.org/lapack/explore-html/d9/d8e/group__double_g_eeigen_ga4e35e1d4e9b63ba9eef4ba8aff3debae.html
> ) shows that the 23 arguments I am passing is correct (and has been for
> years), not the 27 the r-devel build for some reason expects.
>
> Any help greatly appreciated. I've replied along these lines to CRAN
> rejection message, but opening this question to the list in the hope of
> assistance in understanding what's going on with r-devel on such a
> bog-standard LAPACK function, which must have been stable for over a decade.
>
> Thanks in anticipation!
>
> Louis
>
> ______________________________________________
> [email protected] mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>
______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
