[R-pkg-devel] Check time > 10min

[Sebastian Meyer]

Am 03.06.25 um 13:22 schrieb Greg Hunt:
> Dirk,
> Even if he gets the test and example times to zero, his total time in that
> thirteen minute run is still above ten minutes.  In my view the incomplete
> time reporting (we don't know what makes up the thirteen minutes) is a bug
> in the build process.

It is indeed unfortunate and perhaps a bug that the Windows check log 
shows no runtime for

> * checking whether package 'secr' can be installed ... OK

(which on the Debian check machine was reported with 164s)

as well as for the following checks of package loading
(which takes relatively long for 'secr', even on Linux, ~5s each):

> * checking whether the package can be loaded ... OK
> * checking whether the package can be loaded with stated dependencies ... OK
> * checking whether the package can be unloaded cleanly ... OK
> * checking whether the namespace can be loaded with stated dependencies ... OK
> * checking whether the namespace can be unloaded cleanly ... OK
> * checking loading without being on the library search path ... OK
> * checking whether startup messages can be suppressed ... OK

Setting environment variable _R_CHECK_TIMINGS_=0 should reveal timings 
for these checks. (Check option --as-cran only shows timings above 10s 
by default.) I don't currently have a Windows machine at hand to test.

Best,

	Sebastian

> 
> Greg
> 
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 at 10:54, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd using debian.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>> On 3 June 2025 at 00:12, Murray Efford via R-package-devel wrote:
>> | My revision of package 'secr' fails CRAN pre-test on Windows (R 4.5.0)
>> because total check time exceeds 10 min (it's 760 seconds or 13 min). I
>> can't see how to fix this as none of the times listed in the log
>> https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/secr_5.2.2_20250602_054847/Windows/00check.log
>> seems exceptional:
>> | * checking CRAN incoming feasibility ... [18s] OK
>> | * checking R code for possible problems ... [116s] OK
>> | * checking examples ... [87s] OK
>> | * checking tests ... [59s] OK
>> | * checking re-building of vignette outputs ... [42s] OK
>> | * checking PDF version of manual ... [32s] OK
>> | * checking HTML version of manual ... [42s] OK
>> | and the total of these components is only 396 sec (6.6 min), so I must
>> be missing something. I would appreciate any advice.  Not much was added in
>> this release, and I don't like the idea of blindly hacking off bits.
>>
>> To a first approximation every tests is a function of some variable we can
>> describe as 'N' which you, as author of the package and the tests,
>> understand
>> best.
>>
>> Surely you must know a way to define a new N1 <- N/2, or some other
>> appropriate scaling. Then try running with N1 instead. And you can also
>> make
>> both tests and examples _conditional_ on some other control variable.
>>
>> It's all just code. Bend it like Beckham.
>>
>> Dirk
>>
>> |
>> |       [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>> |
>> | ______________________________________________
>> | R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> | https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>>
>> --
>> dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd using debian.org
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> 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