Skip to content
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

License checking #24

Open
peonor opened this issue Jun 7, 2016 · 4 comments
Open

License checking #24

peonor opened this issue Jun 7, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@peonor
Copy link
Contributor

peonor commented Jun 7, 2016

I've had cases now where licenses have been available, but the license checking in the Q2MM code itself fails for various reasons. I'd like a modification so that only proof of licenses unavailable will break here; on checking failure, let the code continue and keep your fingers crossed.

@ericchansen
Copy link
Owner

Do you want something like this? If the regex fails, go for it anyway. This may lead to data misalignment because MacroModel doesn't always return a nonzero exit status when it fails to complete a job, but I suppose it would fail either way.

@peonor
Copy link
Contributor Author

peonor commented Jun 7, 2016

The only thing that would worry me in this case is if there is an old log file from a previous iteration around, that got used instead of the one that should have been created. As long as the data misalignment is guaranteed to cause a crash, not erroneous data, I’d say let it run.

From: Eric Hansen [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: den 7 juni 2016 17:13
To: ericchansen/q2mm q2mm@noreply.github.com
Cc: Norrby, Per-Ola Per-Ola.Norrby@astrazeneca.com; Author author@noreply.github.com
Subject: Re: [ericchansen/q2mm] License checking (#24)

Do you want something like this? If the regex fails, go for it anyway. This may lead to data misalignment because MacroModel doesn't always return a nonzero exit status when it fails to complete a job, but I suppose it would fail either way.


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/24#issuecomment-224312563, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ANVSNF9JEDc1YQtaGcKvoiLix-iIiJdgks5qJYqOgaJpZM4IwBxP.


Confidentiality Notice: This message is private and may contain confidential and proprietary information. If you have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from your system and note that you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Any unauthorized use or disclosure of the contents of this message is not permitted and may be unlawful.

@ericchansen
Copy link
Owner

ericchansen commented Jun 7, 2016

Oh, good thinking. Maybe the simplest way to deal with this would be to delete .q2mm. files before attempting a new MacroModel calculation.

@peonor
Copy link
Contributor Author

peonor commented Jun 7, 2016

Yes. It's not thinking, it's remembering (I've done sooo many mistakes in this field...)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants