On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Dave Bouvier <dave@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, http://testtoolshed.g2.bx.psu.edu/view/peterjc/ncbi_blast_plus/f2478dc77ccb 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 (functional.test_toolbox.TestForTool_testtoolshed.g2.bx.psu.edu/repos/peterjc/ncbi_blast_plus/blastxml_to_tabular/0.0.11) ... Tool id: ncbi_tblastx_wrapper Tool version: ncbi_tblastx_wrapper Test: test_tool_000000 (functional.test_toolbox.TestForTool_testtoolshed.g2.bx.psu.edu/repos/peterjc/ncbi_blast_plus/ncbi_tblastx_wrapper/0.0.21) 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): http://toolshed.g2.bx.psu.edu/view/iuc/package_blast_plus_2_2_26 http://toolshed.g2.bx.psu.edu/view/iuc/package_blast_plus_2_2_27 http://toolshed.g2.bx.psu.edu/view/iuc/package_blast_plus_2_2_28 Any objections? Thanks, Peter