BridgeChainsMover

Member Site › Forums › Rosetta 3 › Rosetta 3 – General › BridgeChainsMover

Viewing 3 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • August 8, 2016 at 12:32 am #2499
      Anonymous

        Hi,

        I am using the 2016.28 build and have the some problems with “BridgeChainsMover” from Brian’s recent method paper: DOI:10.1007/978-1-4939-3569-7_20

        I get this error “ERROR: ‘scorefxn’ is not a valid option for BridgeChainsMover”.  Here is the part of script that returns an error:

        <BridgeChainsMover name=”connect” chain1=”1″ chain2=”2″ motif=”3LX-3LA-3LX” overlap=”3″ scorefxn=”centroid_scorefunction” />

        The paper describes “scorefxn” as compolsory option and if I run the script without “scorefxn” option,  I get this:

        ERROR: connect: No score function set!

        ERROR:: Exit from: src/protocols/denovo_design/movers/BridgeChainsMover.cc line: 178

        Is there an easy way around this? I would appreciate any thoughts on this.

        Thanks,

        Maz

         

      • August 8, 2016 at 4:23 pm #11780
        Anonymous

          You found a bug!  I sent it along to Tom Linksy.  He said:

          “

          Pull request 1514 fixes this. This is my fault — I refactored this a couple of weeks ago and somehow the scorefxn option got lost.  Will push the fix an integration test as soon as the test servers are done with it

          “

          I guess look for the fix in the next release.  Thanks for finding it!

        • August 30, 2016 at 7:57 pm #11822
          Anonymous

            Thanks Steve, I’m using 2016.32.58837 now and the bug is gone.

          • August 30, 2016 at 8:47 pm #11823
            Anonymous

              Well, Tom Linsky deserves the thanks for fixing it, but we’re glad it’s working.

            • August 8, 2016 at 10:45 pm #11781
              Anonymous

                Tom suggests that this is a recent interface bug that he thinks the code from further back will work – maybe try the 3.6 release (which is from April) or something from early in this year.

              • August 8, 2016 at 10:46 pm #11782
                Anonymous

                  I guess it’s relevant that he also tells me that I’m wrong about when this file was released and that it should be there for a year or so back.

              • Author
                Posts
              Viewing 3 reply threads
              • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.