Skip to content

Matrix install fails because of defunct save in require

8 messages · Berwin A Turlach, Uwe Ligges, Brian Ripley +1 more

Original
Thomas Petzoldt
# 
Dear R-Devel,

I've just tried to compile the fresh R-devel and found that the install 
of package Matrix failed:

---------------------------------------------
** help
*** installing help indices
** building package indices ...
Error in require(Matrix, save = FALSE) :
   unused argument(s) (save = FALSE)
ERROR: installing package indices failed
---------------------------------------------


possible reason: Matrix/data/*.R

News.Rd says:

The \code{save} argument of \code{require()} is defunct.


Thomas Petzoldt
Uwe Ligges
#
On 17.09.2010 16:04, Thomas Petzoldt wrote:
Have you got the Matrix package from the appropriate 2.12/recommended 
repository or installed via

make rsync-recommended
make recommended



In that case it works for me.

Uwe
Berwin A Turlach
# 
G'day Uwe,

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 19:22:04 +0200
Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        
Are those the commands that should now be used?  My script is
essentially doing:

	svn up
	tools/rsync-recommended
	make 
	make check FORCE=FORCE

Running the script now, I experience the same problem as Thomas.  But I
note that Thomas did not state exactly what he is compiling.  My 'svn
up' updates the version checked out from:
	https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk
which I think of as R-devel.   
Now after the svn up the file VERSION in the source directory says:
	2.13.0 Under development (unstable)
The SVN-REVISION file in my build directory says:
	Revision: 52938
	Last Changed Date: 2010-09-17
And I have Matrix_0.999375-44.tar.gz in src/library/Recommended of my
source directory.

As you refer to 2.12/recommended, you and Thomas might talk about
different versions when talking about R-devel.

Cheers,

	Berwin

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Uwe Ligges
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On 17.09.2010 19:54, Berwin A Turlach wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        
Indeed, I referred to R-prerelease (alpha / to be R-2.12.0 in October) 
rather than R-devel (perhaps to be R-2.13.0 next April or so).

Uwe

            

      
      
      
    

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Thomas Petzoldt
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On 17.09.2010 19:22, Uwe Ligges wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        
>

            

      
      
      
    

        
Yes, I did it this way, but did you use svn version before 52932 or a 
version equal or newer than 52940?

The svn log shows that in the meantime Brian Ripley added a workaround:

Revision: 52940
Author: ripley
Date: 19:31:48, Freitag, 17. September 2010
Message:
keep dummy require(save=FALSE) for now
----
Modified : /trunk/doc/NEWS.Rd
Modified : /trunk/src/library/base/R/library.R
Modified : /trunk/src/library/base/man/library.Rd


Is solved for now.

Thanks, Thomas P.

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Brian Ripley
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
I'm not sure why end users would be using R-devel rather than R-alpha 
at this point, but I have already changed R-devel to allow Matrix to 
get updated before it fails.

Warning: R-devel tends to be particularly unstable during the period 
when we are in alpha/beta/RC phases.

        
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010, Berwin A Turlach wrote:

        

            

      
      
      
    

        

      
      
    

        

  
    

      
      
    

  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Thomas Petzoldt
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On 17.09.2010 20:04, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        
Yes I realized the update and successfully recompiled it. Many thanks.

"End users" or package developers want to keep own packages compatible 
with future versions, so maintaining svn syncs is much more efficient 
than downloading snapshoots. In the current case it would have been much 
easier for me, of course, to go back to an older svn release (as I 
sometimes do). However, I felt to be responsible for reporting issues as 
contribution to the open source development process.

O.K., I'll wait a little bit longer in the future and many thanks for 
developing this great software.

ThPe

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Brian Ripley
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010, Thomas Petzoldt wrote:

        

            

      
      
      
    

        
But many of us svn sync e.g. R-2-12-branch rather than use snapshots.

            

      
      
      
    

        
I think the advice in the Windows binary download page

'This is a development version of R. It likely contains bugs, so be 
careful if you use it. Please don't report bugs in this version 
through the usual R bug reporting system, please report them on the 
r-devel mailing list---but only if they persist for a few days.'

is spot-on. It takes at least several hours, maybe a couple of days, 
for the package checks to reveal problems with changes in R-devel, 
especially platform-specific ones.