Skip to content

[R-pkg-devel] help understanding "CRAN Package Check Results for Package Ecdat"

3 messages · Spencer Graves, Duncan Murdoch

#
Hello, All:


"CRAN Package Check Results for Package Ecdat"[1] flags a "NOTE" on all 
platforms. I don't understand any of them.


For example, the check results from some but not all platforms include:


** No Authors at R field in DESCRIPTION.
Please add one, modifying
   Authors at R: c(person(given = "Yves",
                       family = "Croissant",
                       role = "aut",
                       email = "yves.croissant at let.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr"),
                person(given = "Spencer",
                       family = "Graves",
                       role = c("aut", "cre"),
                       email = "spencer.graves at effectivedefense.org"))
as necessary.


** The DESCRIPTION file includes exactly this Author at R field, which 
seems to be what they want, but which I read as complaining it's not 
there. ???


** Some of these check results also complain about "Lost braces". The 
braces seem to be there with the standard syntax that I understand from 
what I read in "Writing R Extensions".


** "Found the following Rd file(s) with Rd \link{} targets missing 
package anchors:
   USFinanceIndustry.Rd: readNIPA"


** In that Rd file, I find "\code{\link[Ecfun]{readNIPA}}"


What am I missing? Thanks, Spencer Graves


[1]


https://cran.rstudio.com//web/checks/check_results_Ecdat.html
#
On 2025-08-27 2:22 p.m., Spencer Graves wrote:
Version 0.4-2 didn't include that.  The link you sent points to check 
results for that version (which was uploaded in 2022).
I think the "lost braces" are unnecessary braces.  For example, you have

   \doi{10.18128/D010.V10.0}{IPUMS USA: Version 10.0 [dataset]. 
Minneapolis, MN: IPUMS}

as though \doi{} needs two arguments, but it only needs one.
In 0.4-2 you have

\seealso{
   \code{\link{readNIPA}}
}

Duncan Murdoch
#
Hi, Duncan:


Thanks for the reply.


Please excuse: I should have checked that but didn't think to do so.


Thanks again, Spencer Graves
On 8/27/25 14:13, Duncan Murdoch wrote: