Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Mar 2017 08:29:19 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 14 04:29:18 2017 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54721 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cnhpW-0000Ig-O5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:29:18 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54571) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cnhpV-0000IT-2c for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:29:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnhpO-00014S-RV for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:29:11 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:46586) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnhpO-00014O-PH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:29:10 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45510) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnhpM-0005M2-GH for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:29:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnhpH-00011R-KO for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:29:08 -0400 Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com ([135.84.80.216]:21020) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnhpH-00010f-E4 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:29:03 -0400 Received: from localhost (xd933fe09.dyn.telefonica.de [217.51.254.9]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1489480138371144.2514938811363; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 01:28:58 -0700 (PDT) User-agent: mu4e 0.9.18; emacs 25.1.1 From: Ricardo Wurmus To: guix-patches@gnu.org Subject: R: do not build recommended packages X-URL: https://example.com X-PGP-Key: https://example.com/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:28:55 +0100 Message-ID: <87h92w1cu0.fsf@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) This relates to bug 25598 “R packages are not bit-reproducible”. R itself does not build reproducibly. One of the reasons is that it includes recommended packages that are built in a random temporary directory. The build paths for each of these packages is then embedded in the packages’ “paths.rds” files. We don’t have this problem when building the packages with the “r-build-system” like any other R package. This patch set adds package expressions for each of the recommended packages, disables building of recommended packages, and adds some of these packages to those R packages that need them. I’ve successfully rebuilt all R packages to make sure that these changes don’t break anything. I also have an unpolished patch to fix bug 25598, but it depends on this patch set. -- Ricardo GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC https://example.com