[R-pkg-devel] puzzling CRAN rejection

 ? Sure.? I assume I should aim for <10 minutes since that's the 
threshold for a NOTE ...? (for what it's worth the tests take a bit less 
than 25% as long on my Linux laptop, since an individual test run is 
more than twice as fast and we only have to check one architecture ...)

 ? Do I interpret correctly that the advice is to address this problem, 
bump the version number, and re-submit?

 ? cheers
 ?? Ben Bolker

On 10/12/20 5:18 PM, Uwe Ligges wrote:

Actually more than 23 minutes check time for a single package is 
really excessive, can you pls cut that down?

This comes from

** running tests for arch 'i386' ... [509s] OK
** running tests for arch 'x64' ... [501s] OK

so only tests take 1010 seconds already.

I see that lme4 is a really important package that may justify some 
extra check time, but this is really a lot.

Can you please reduce the check time in the tests? e.g. using toy data 
and few iterations? Or by running less important tests only 
conditionally if some environment variable is set that you only define 
on your machine?

Best,
Uwe Ligges

On 12.10.2020 22:25, Ben Bolker wrote:

?? Thanks, but I don't think that's the problem because:

??? (1) Those are reported as being from the last released version, 
not this one.
??? (2) As far as I can tell from my local tests, I'm pretty sure 
I've fixed these issues in the current release.
??? (3) In my experience UBSAN tests don't generally get re-run for a 
while after the initial CRAN testing anyway ...

?? cheers
???? Ben


On 10/12/20 4:23 PM, I?aki Ucar wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 22:04, Ben Bolker <bbolker at gmail.com> wrote:

??? Before I risk wasting the CRAN maintainers' time with a query, can
anyone see what I'm missing here?? Everything I can see looks OK, with
the possible exception of the 'NA' result for "CRAN incoming
feasibility" on r-devel-windows-ix86+x86_64 (which surely isn't my 
fault???)

??? Any help appreciated, as always.

??? Ben Bolker

There are UBSAN issues:

Last released version's additional issues:
??? gcc-UBSAN 
<https://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/bdr/memtests/gcc-UBSAN/lme4>