-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
mismatch between model names valid for dragonflye 1.1.0 and medaka 1.8.0 #19
Comments
Problem is clearly not enough cores or RAM. ...more seriously, I thought something else might happen when pinning flye 2.9.2 (I'm guessing that's what you meant), thus backed off for someone else to try first 😈 Thank you for being that person! So the wrapper is actually still passing kit14 along fine to flye2.9.2, just not medaka models for kit 14? That's actually still pretty awesome, I think I'm going to pin these too. Non- kit 14 models with medaka 1.8.0 are still polishing fine? |
yes, it's flye 2.9.2, sorry (corrected in original post) |
Hi @flass I'll get this fixed today, let me know if you think its worth updating the medaka recipe to include those missing models. Cheers, |
@flass I think I have this fixed now, if you want to give it a try. Here's the link to download: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rpetit3/dragonflye/main/bin/dragonflye |
Thank you Robert. I tried executing your dragonflye 1.1.1 sscript from within my docker container for v1.1.0 and it seems that it works!
will you have this released as a bioconda recipe / biocontainer image sometimes soon? Best wishes, Florent |
Awesome, I'll get a version release submitted. It'll take a few hours to get synced on Bioconda, as I think I just missed the hourly bot auto-bump job |
Awesome! No worries, I can wait tomorrow ;-) |
any chance that the bioconda recipe (and hence the resulting biocontainer) will pick up flye 2.9.2 and medaka 1.8.0 by default? |
I'll verify in the build, but assuming yes. Probably going to pin medaka to >=1.8.0. Think its worth pinning flye as well? Maybe just flye>=2.9 |
yes I'd say so it's worth pinning both - the flye 2.9.2 assembly has worked fine for me (can't really comment on quality though). it would defintely be worth having a bunch (or all) of medaka models included the bioconda recipe. I personally wished to have the following: Thanks! |
If dragonflye now supporting more efficient kit 14 alignment with newer flye anyway, my vote would def. be yes! P.S. I tried adding your channel as I thought that would not suffer a delay. Now rereading and see you're just pushing it straight to bioconda! |
@flass Mind double checking those, I think we are getting them now. Here's what I'm getting with v1.1.1 (haha might not have to do anything!)
|
yep, all good, I have all I need there! |
v1.1.1 is now available: it should include medaka 1.8.0 and flye 2.9.2, let me know if not. Otherwise I think we are good here! Thank you for the help, and please feel free to reopen |
Hi,
I have made a conda install of dragonflye (within a docker image), forcing the dependencies for flye and medaka to be the latest versions:
this works, but if I want to specifiy the use of the latest model
r1041_e82_400bps_sup_v420
, I get an error at the medaka stage:Indeed medaka wants something like this:
r1041_e82_400bps_sup_v4.2.0
, with dots in the version name.If trying to give that medaka-valid value to dragonflye:
then dragonflye fails at the argument validation step:
Could you please change your validation scheme so that it matches that of medaka?
Best wishes,
Florent
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: