[Rd] Package dependencies and imports

[John Fox]

Dear Martin and Kurt,

Adding "Enhances: rgl" to the description file did the trick!

Thank you,
 John

--------------------------------
John Fox
Department of Sociology
McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario
Canada L8S 4M4
905-525-9140x23604
http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/jfox 
-------------------------------- 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Maechler [mailto:maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:48 AM
> To: John Fox
> Cc: r-devel at stat.math.ethz.ch
> Subject: Re: [Rd] Package dependencies and imports
> 
> >>>>> "JohnF" == John Fox <jfox at mcmaster.ca>
> >>>>>     on Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:22:17 -0400 writes:
> 
>     JohnF> Dear list members,
> 
>     JohnF> I'm encountering the following problem with 
> package dependencies and
>     JohnF> imports: 
> 
>     JohnF> The Rcmdr package doesn't declare a formal dependency
>     JohnF> (via depends or suggests in the package DESCRIPTION)
>     JohnF> on the rgl package because the latter apparently
>     JohnF> causes problems on some systems. This allows the
>     JohnF> Rcmdr package to build and check on systems without
>     JohnF> rgl present; if rgl isn't present, then menu items
>     JohnF> using it are disabled (in the development version of
>     JohnF> the Rcmdr package, not installed in the first place).
> 
>     JohnF> If rgl is present, however, the Rcmdr package uses
>     JohnF> some unexported functions in it. I've done this via
>     JohnF> rgl::: to avoid importing from the rgl namespace:
>     JohnF> Because rgl isn't declared as a dependency, I can't
>     JohnF> import its namespace. In the current R 2.4.0 alpha
>     JohnF> and R 2.5.0 devel, however, using rgl::: generates a
>     JohnF> warning when the package is checked.
> 
>     JohnF> Is there a way around this short of literally 
> copying the unexported
>     JohnF> functions in rgl that Rcmdr uses?
> 
> I think you should use the new DESCRIPTION field and say
>   'Enhances: rgl'
> 
> but I haven't checked if this prevents the warning,  though I 
> think it should..
> 
> Regards,
> Martin