Skip to content

[R-pkg-devel] stringi update

3 messages · Hadley Wickham, Patrick Giraudoux

#
Thnaks for the hint, but I have tried several? mirrors and still get the 
same trouble:

 > update.packages(ask='graphics',checkBuilt=TRUE)

 ? There are binary versions available but the source versions are later:
 ??????? binary source needs_compilation
stringi? 1.1.7? 1.2.4????????????? TRUE

Do you want to install from sources the packages which need compilation?
y/n:

Which re-install the same version at each update...




Le 10/09/2018 ? 17:17, R. Mark Sharp a ?crit?:
#
Looking at the primary CRAN site:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/stringi/index.html, you can
see that the windows binary is still at 1.1.7, suggesting that there's
some build failure. You can see exactly what that is on the CRAN check
page: https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_stringi.html

Hadley
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 1:24 AM Patrick Giraudoux
<patrick.giraudoux at univ-fcomte.fr> wrote:

  
    
#
Indeed. Clear enough:

  * using R version 3.5.1 (2018-07-02)
  * using platform: x86_64-w64-mingw32 (64-bit)
  * using session charset: ISO8859-1
  * checking for file 'stringi/DESCRIPTION' ... OK
  * checking extension type ... Package
  * this is package 'stringi' version '1.2.4'
  * checking package namespace information ... OK
  * checking package dependencies ... OK
  * checking if this is a source package ... OK
  * checking if there is a namespace ... OK
  * checking for hidden files and directories ... OK
  * checking for portable file names ... OK
  * checking whether package 'stringi' can be installed ... ERROR
    Installation failed.
    See 'd:/Rcompile/CRANpkg/local/3.5/stringi.Rcheck/00install.out' for
    details.
  * DONE
    See
    https://www.r-project.org/nosvn/R.check/r-release-windows-ix86+x86_64/stringi-00install.html
    for details.

Suppose the package maintainer will fix it... but the error is there 
since some months... Will post the issue on github (stringi development 
site).


Le 15/09/2018 ? 16:54, Hadley Wickham a ?crit?: