On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Dave Bouvier <d...@bx.psu.edu> wrote:
> Peter,
> Thanks for bringing this to our attention, we're working on fixing a number
> of issues with the test framework, and hope to have more information for you
> tomorrow.
>  --Dave B.

Hi Dave,

Good news, the BLAST+ tests appear to have all passed on the Test Tool Shed,

Tool test results
Automated test environment
Time tested: ~ 5 hours ago
System: Linux 3.8.0-30-generic
Architecture: x86_64
Python version: 2.7.4
Galaxy revision: 11318:7553213e0646
Galaxy database version: 117
Tool shed revision:
Tool shed database version:
Tool shed mercurial version:
Tests that passed successfully
Tool id: blastxml_to_tabular
Tool version: blastxml_to_tabular
Test: test_tool_000000
Tool id: ncbi_tblastx_wrapper
Tool version: ncbi_tblastx_wrapper
Test: test_tool_000000

Curiously however, this no longer seems to be complaining about
the BLAST+ tools without any tests - a new bug?

Over on the main Tool Shed, the binary installation seems to be failing
(still using the bash script magic - is the test system still missing bash,
or is there a different problem here?). Here too, there doesn't seem to
be any mention of the tools missing tests.

At this point (given it is working on the Test Tool Shed), I think it should
be safe to update the BLAST+ packages to use the new architecture/os
specific <action> tags (a recent feature which is now supported in the
stable Galaxy releases):


Any objections?


Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at:

Reply via email to