[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Conflict between R 4.5 and some (mostly r-bioc 3.20) R packages



It looks like r-cran-rlang isn't the only case where a package built in R 4.5 doesn't work in R 4.4. In particular, at least two such packages (r-cran-svglite #1103369 and r-cran-timechange #1103118) have got into testing as binNMUs.

This will stop being an immediate problem if R 4.5 migrates, but we probably don't want it to happen again: see #1104406. How was it decided that R 4.5 didn't require incrementing r-api?

On 29/04/2025 14:24, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:

On 29 April 2025 at 13:47, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote:
| Ideally r-base should be re-uploaded with
|
| r-base-core Breaks: r-bioc-bioccheck (<< 1.42.1+dfsg-2~), r-bioc-graph
| (<< 1.84.1-2~), r-bioc-iranges (<< 2.40.1-3~), r-bioc-pwalign (<<
| 1.2.0-3~), r-cran-rlang (<< 1.1.5-2~), r-cran-testthat (<< 3.2.3~)

r-bioc-graph, r-bioc-irange[s],

These are not on the excuses list because their fixed versions have already migrated to testing.

 r-cran-rlang, r-cran-testthat are
not on the current excuses page [1] However, r-bioc-shortread and r-cran-ff
are and they are missing from that list.

r-bioc-shortread is fixed by changes in r-bioc-pwalign; r-cran-ff is fixed by changes in r-cran-testthat.

(I'm not sure why r-cran-rlang isn't on the excuses list: possibly because the autopkgtest that considered migrating them together was run after the one that considered migrating r-base alone.)


Reply to: