The .tex version of the manual in foo.Rcheck

G'day Bendix,

On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:52:02 +0200

In version 2.8.1, running Rcmd check on the package foo would leave
the file foo-manual.tex in the folder foo.Rcheck.

But as of 2.9.0 only foo-manual.pdf and foo-manual.log are there.

Is this intentional?

I do not know whether it is intentional, but it seems that parts
of `check' were substantially re-written due to the new Rd parser.  As
far as I can understand the Perl code, the .tex file is only copied to
the .Rcheck directory if an error occurs while the file is processed.

But this can easily be changed by moving two lines in the script a bit
higher, see the attached patch.  

Cheers,

	Berwin

=========================== Full address =============================
Berwin A Turlach                            Tel.: +65 6516 4416 (secr)
Dept of Statistics and Applied Probability        +65 6516 6650 (self)
Faculty of Science                          FAX : +65 6872 3919       
National University of Singapore     
6 Science Drive 2, Blk S16, Level 7          e-mail: statba at nus.edu.sg
Singapore 117546                    http://www.stat.nus.edu.sg/~statba

Bendix,

you can also take a source package an run

R CMD Rd2dvi --no-clean packageName

on it and you will get a temporary directory with the TeX sources in it.


Best wishes,
Uwe

In version 2.8.1, running Rcmd check on the package foo would leave the file foo-manual.tex in the folder foo.Rcheck.

But as of 2.9.0 only foo-manual.pdf and foo-manual.log are there.

Is this intentional?
Anyway it is inconvenient, because I would occasionally like to include the manual at the end of a set of exercises, and this was a convenient file to \input with a few select %'s added.

br.
Bendix

_______________________________________________

Bendix Carstensen 
Senior Statistician
Steno Diabetes Center
Niels Steensens Vej 2-4
DK-2820 Gentofte
Denmark
+45 44 43 87 38 (direct)
+45 30 75 87 38 (mobile)
bxc at steno.dk   http://www.biostat.ku.dk/~bxc
www.steno.dk

This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended for ...{{dropped:8}}

______________________________________________
R-help at r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

G'day Uwe,

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:03:43 +0200

you can also take a source package an run

R CMD Rd2dvi --no-clean packageName

on it and you will get a temporary directory with the TeX sources in
it.

Which is fine for manual processing and when done once or twice, but
somewhat less helpful for automatic processing in scripts since the
name of the temporary directory is hard to predict.

`R CMD check foo' copies already unconditionally the foo-manual.log
file from the temporary directory to the foo.Rcheck directory; and the
foo-manual.tex file is copied if an error occurs during processing.
What is the problem with also copying the foo-manual.tex file
unconditionally to foo.Rcheck?

Cheers,
	
	Berwin

G'day Uwe,

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:03:43 +0200
Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> wrote:

you can also take a source package an run

R CMD Rd2dvi --no-clean packageName

on it and you will get a temporary directory with the TeX sources in
it.

Which is fine for manual processing and when done once or twice, but
somewhat less helpful for automatic processing in scripts since the
name of the temporary directory is hard to predict.

`R CMD check foo' copies already unconditionally the foo-manual.log
file from the temporary directory to the foo.Rcheck directory; and the
foo-manual.tex file is copied if an error occurs during processing.
What is the problem with also copying the foo-manual.tex file
unconditionally to foo.Rcheck?

No problem at all, I think.

Uwe

Cheers,
	
	Berwin