R chek of package VR is broken (PR#1683)

[ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Kurt Hornik wrote:

> >>>>> ripley  writes:
>
> > On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 10:00:11PM +0200, ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk wrote:
> >> > and the under-qualified pilot applied it to a *binary* installed package,
> >> > despite the emphasized warning.
> >>
> >> I wonder if "R CMD check ... " could abort with an error message if it is
> >> applied to a binary package?
>
> > I am not sure how simple that is.  It used to be hard to tell source
> > and binary packages apart.  What we can do is to test for Built: in
> > the DESCRIPTION file, which will cope with people who have built the
> > package recently.
>
> This was introduced in 1.4 I think (?) so it seems we can change the
> heuristics now to rely on the correspondence Built: <-> binary.  I will
> soon (once I have time again) change INSTALL accordingly.

Not necessarily, as people do manually install packages.  I've added the
test for Built in R CMD check for 1.6.0, which should catch a lot of
misuses.

-- 
Brian D. Ripley,                  ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics,  http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford,             Tel:  +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road,                     +44 1865 272860 (secr)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK                Fax:  +44 1865 272595

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._