nanoreviser
nanoreviser copied to clipboard
Problem during run and during unitest.sh
Hi,
I installed the gpu version of nanoreviser, and everything supposedly when ok, but the unitest.sh failed:
(nanorev) [jpac1984@o0311 nanoreviser]$ sh unitest.sh
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "NanoReviser.py", line 26, in
Also, then I thought, that I might have been the case of the test, so I tried running a test with some real data, and it failed too.
Here is the command line:
(nanorev) [jpac1984@o0311 nanoreviser]$ python NanoReviser.py -d /fs/scratch/PHS0338/MDA-T7-BC05/ -o ./MDA-T7-BC05/ -S human -F fastq
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "NanoReviser.py", line 26, in
Thanks;
Hi
I also faced the same problem. I installed albacore after downloading from official ONT webpage with following commant
python -m pip install ont_albacore-2.3.4-cp36-cp36m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl Processing ./ont_albacore-2.3.4-cp36-cp36m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
Hope that helps!!
Best
sorry the command was only
python -m pip install ont_albacore-2.3.4-cp36-cp36m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
afterwards I ran
python NanoReviser.py -d ./unitest/test_data/fast5/ -o ./unitest_nanorev_results/ -S ecoli -F fastq
and it worked.
Well. It doesn't help much. I have processed my reads with Guppy not with Albacore which is not supported nor recommended by ONT.
Get BlueMail for Androidhttp://www.bluemail.me/r?b=16117 On Jan 12, 2021, at 05:36, Christoph-Ammer <[email protected]mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Hi I also faced the same problem. I installed albacore after downloading from official ONT webpage with following commant python -m pip install ont_albacore-2.3.4-cp36-cp36m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl Processing ./ont_albacore-2.3.4-cp36-cp36m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl Hope that helps!! Best
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fpkubioinformatics%2Fnanoreviser%2Fissues%2F2%23issuecomment-758565789&data=04%7C01%7Cja569116%40ohio.edu%7Cae75ab9968274e71016708d8b6e5ed80%7Cf3308007477c4a70888934611817c55a%7C0%7C0%7C637460445938553413%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=ngRLAjMXZSl1wCyGuA9G%2BHYSGQyvKqb6KpXuMkdPVTo%3D&reserved=0, or unsubscribehttps://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FAJWD2VKLFTLI3FYSBO56QZ3SZQQ27ANCNFSM4UYOJVZQ&data=04%7C01%7Cja569116%40ohio.edu%7Cae75ab9968274e71016708d8b6e5ed80%7Cf3308007477c4a70888934611817c55a%7C0%7C0%7C637460445938553413%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=dViTGr3F7JitBrjcagK%2FTB5Em9%2BDNXOJ%2FuguSqLvt7Q%3D&reserved=0.
I agree! But the tool just works with albacore. Also in their paper the authors did not include analysis with guppy. I will try to compare the results from nanoreviser with these from guppy and if I do not see any significant differences I will stick to the official workflow from ONT --> guppy:-)