[R-pkg-devel] NOTE about lack of prebuilt manual

[Uwe Ligges]

On 08.07.2024 16:08, Iris Simmons wrote:
> This is something I'd run into recently as well.
> 
> The R devs changed the default from building the manual to not building the
> manual. Now if you want (or need) to build the manual, you should add


Well, not really, we still build manuals unless file(s) containing 
install/render-stage \Sexpr{}  are present (as in this case).

Best,
Uwe Ligges



> BuildManual: TRUE
> 
> to your DESCRIPTION.
> 
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2024, 10:05 Michael Dewey <lists using dewey.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> Short version
>>
>> I have recently tried to update two of my CRAN packages and I am getting
>> the NOTE from R CMD check --as-cran
>>
>> Package has help file(s) containing install/render-stage \Sexpr{}
>> expressions but no prebuilt PDF manual.
>>
>> (It comes on one line in the check.log)
>>
>> What am I doing wrong?
>>
>> ===================
>>
>> More details
>>
>> Both packages have lived successfuly on CRAN for some time but my recent
>> attempts to update lead to the NOTE shown above. I notice that the
>> version currently on CRAN do have in the tarball a directory called
>> build which amongst other thing does contain the package manual. However
>> when I build the updated versions the tarball still contains a build
>> directory but without the manual.
>>
>> I am using 4.4.1 under Windows 10. I open a command line and do
>> everything from there with R CMD, I do not use any helper package. The
>> help files do not explicitly contain any instance of \Sexpr{} but they
>> do contain macros. Both of them use mathjaxr and Rdpack and one also has
>> some macros written by me. They have been like that for some while. The
>> Rd files are hand-written, I do not use any package to generate
>> documentation.
>>
>> I notice that R CMD build has an option to turn off the manual but I do
>> not set that and there does not seem to be a turn on option. I have
>> looked at the NEWS for R4.4.0 and 4.4.1 but withou enlightenment. The
>> versions on CRAN were probably generated with R 4.3.3 judgin by the date
>> when I made them.
>>
>> I know it is only a NOTE but I would like to know why it is happening.
>>
>> I hope that is enough detail to be helpful but I can expand on any
>> unclear areas.
>>
>> --
>> Michael
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>>
> 
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel