attempt to fix 2019-February/010296.html

[boennecd]

PR as requested in #1112.

The following passes with one warning:

R CMD build --no-build-vignettes Rcpp
R CMD check --as-cran Rcpp_1.0.5.2.tar.gz

I used --no-build-vignettes as I got an error otherwise. This resulted in some warnings.

I figure the changes are minor and thus I have not added anything to the ChangeLog file.

[eddelbuettel]

PR looks good. A ChangeLog entry is always welcomed and encouraged but I can add it.

Out of curiousity (and as that is also indirectly my stack in another package) what goes wrong on vignettes, esp now that the pdf ones are all pre-made?

[boennecd]

Out of curiousity (and as that is also indirectly my stack in another package) what goes wrong on vignettes, esp now that the pdf ones are all pre-made?

When I run R CMD build Rcpp then I get:

* checking for file ‘Rcpp/DESCRIPTION’ ... OK
* preparing ‘Rcpp’:
* checking DESCRIPTION meta-information ... OK
* cleaning src
* running ‘cleanup’
* installing the package to build vignettes
* creating vignettes ... ERROR
--- re-building ‘Rcpp-FAQ.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-FAQ.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-attributes.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-attributes.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-extending.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-extending.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-introduction.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-introduction.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-jss-2011.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-jss-2011.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-libraries.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-libraries.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-modules.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-modules.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-package.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-package.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-quickref.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-quickref.Rnw’

--- re-building ‘Rcpp-sugar.Rnw’ using Sweave
--- finished re-building ‘Rcpp-sugar.Rnw’

Rscript -e 'tools::texi2pdf("Rcpp-attributes.tex", texi2dvi="pdflatex")'
Error in texi2dvi(file = file, pdf = TRUE, clean = clean, quiet = quiet,  : 
  Running 'texi2dvi' on 'Rcpp-attributes.tex' failed.
LaTeX errors:
! Package pdfpages Error: Cannot find file `pdf/Rcpp-attributes.pdf'.

See the pdfpages package documentation for explanation.
Type  H <return>  for immediate help.
 ...                                              
! Emergency stop.
 ...                                              
                                                  
l.10 ...-, fitpaper=true]{pdf/Rcpp-attributes.pdf}
                                                  
!  ==> Fatal error occurred, no output PDF file produced!
Calls: <Anonymous> -> texi2dvi
Execution halted
Makefile:34: recipe for target 'Rcpp-attributes.pdf' failed
make: *** [Rcpp-attributes.pdf] Error 1
Error in tools::buildVignettes(dir = ".", tangle = TRUE) : 
  running 'make' failed
Execution halted

I am not sure if I should call something prior to R CMD build.

[eddelbuettel]

My first hunch was case. Does not seem to be the case.

My second hunch is "as it works for me" that some files are not in git that for that operation to succeed have to be.

I'll take a look. Thanks for the heads-up!

[kevinushey]

LGTM as well!

[eddelbuettel]

Not expecting any issues but as I was just re-running rev.deps for 1.0.5.2 I created a branch-off-the-PR (which Emacs magit makes easy too with one command) and am testing that now as a 1.0.5.3 candidate.

[eddelbuettel]

Re the R CMD build ... failing: my brain fart. Repo lacks the vignettes/pdf/ directory I have here. Will commit that once we're done with the PR. Sorry about that, and thanks for calmly noticing and reporting that too :)

[boennecd]

Sorry about that, and thanks for calmly noticing and reporting that too :)

No problem and happy help. I actually thought that the simple explanation that the vignettes/pdf directory was missing could not be true. Thus, I wrote:

I am not sure if I should call something prior to R CMD build.

[eddelbuettel]

I actually thought that the simple explanation [...] could not be true.

Isn't it usually the opposite? A textbook case of Occam's razor, no? ;-)

[eddelbuettel]

This has now been corrected as well in eff4359 --- thanks for the heads-up, @boennecd. This was "simple" one over-zealous line in a .gitignore but I could have / should have noticed earlier too.

[eddelbuettel]

Thanks again for everybody's patience. This is now 'live' in Rcpp 1.0.6 which just got to CRAN under our bi-annual release cycle.