Windows users might like to download the free editor Notepad++ (
http://notepad-plus-plus.org/) as a replacement for the dire editor that
comes as standard with the OS. This handles end of line conversions, does
hex dumps, syntax highlighting etc. You *can* make a decent OS out of
Windows - once you obtain enough third party components.

Cheers

-- David


On 27 September 2011 05:22, Robbie Joosten <[email protected]>wrote:

> One would assume that Windows software would read DOS/Windows type text
> files...
> Open the file in Wordpad. Unlike Notepad, it is able to work with Windows
> and Unix type text files. If you edit something and save the file, it will
> be in Windows style. If Superpose stops on that, it should really be
> updated. I'm sure that there are Windows versions op the programs Unix2dos
> and Dos2unix which were the programs to use to convert one type to the
> other. You can also use Word to search and replace the linefeeds.
>
> Good luck with this very retro problem.
> Cheers,
> Robbie
>
> > Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:07:50 -0600
> > From: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Superpose, SSM
> > To: [email protected]
>
> >
> > I think something in your workflow is inserting dos line feeds (\n\r or
> \r\n, I can't remember which).
> >
> > If I have guessed correctly, you want to remove those "\r"s before
> proceeding (or never let them get in there in the first place).
> >
> > You claim to open it with MS something, which would insert dos line feeds
> as part of Operation Vendor Lock. Did you happen to save it, perhaps by
> habit? That would do the trick. It might even do something insidious and
> insert those linefeeds without your purposefully saving the document.
> >
> > Your best bet to fix the file after corruption is vim (used to be that
> "crystallographers" could use real text editors).
> >
> > The command in vim is:
> >
> > :%s/\r//g
> >
> > You might find some third party utility that fixes linefeeds for $30.00
> somewhere, if vim is too "retro".
> >
> > Otherwise, you may want to start over, skip checking it out in MS
> something, and go straight to superpose.
> >
> > James
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sep 26, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Matthias Zebisch wrote:
> >
> > > Hi again,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your quick replies but I think I made myself not clear. here
> is what I'm doing:
> > >
> > > 1) superpose proteinA.pdb onto proteinB.pdb : works, but gives out
> proteinA_lsq1.pdb with extra empty lines (not the anisou lines ;o) )
> > >
> > > 2) superpose proteinA_lsq1.pdb onto proteinC.pdb : doesnt work because
> proteinA_lsq1.pdb cannot be read
> > >
> > > Any ideas?
> > > Even if there is some compatibility issue between CCP4 and windows, I
> guess superpose should be able to read its own files, shouldnt it?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Matthias
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/26/2011 9:13 PM, Jacob Keller wrote:
> > >> I vaguely recall notepad doing something wacky with files in certain
> > >> cases...why don't you get the excellent text editor NoteTab Light
> > >> [sic] (I use it all the time--free and works great), then take a look
> > >> at your files and see whether MS notepad altered the files.
> > >>
> > >> JPK
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Matthias Zebisch
> > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>> Dear CCP4 users,
> > >>>
> > >>> I am using the ccp4i version 6.2.0 under windows 7. I've come across
> a
> > >>> problem with superpose.
> > >>> The outputfile appears to have additional line feeds (see picture)
> which,
> > >>> however are not seen in the windows notepad.
> > >>> The structure can also be opened in coot and pymol. However, it is
> not
> > >>> possible to use it within CCP4, eg. for a subsequent superposition.
> > >>>
> > >>> Is this problem known to anybody and is there a simple workaround
> available?
> > >>> I need to compare hell of a lot of relative domain orientations...
> > >>>
> > >>> I did not have this problem on a second computer with ccp4 6.1.2.
> When I
> > >>> updated to 6.2.0, the situation was as described above.
> > >>>
> > >>> Any help will be highly appreciated,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks, Matthias
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
>

Reply via email to