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

Fix esolver by changing sol path in esolver command #544

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

zakandrewking
Copy link
Contributor

This small fix was necessary for me to solve with esolver in cobrapy 0.6.2.

Using esolver version: QSopt_ex 2.5.10.3.

@hredestig
Copy link
Contributor

Cheers for the fix, I guess you are aware but esolver solver interface is deprecated (doesn't say we can't merge this for now of course), do you need it? In that case perhaps you can comment on opencobra/optlang#113 ?

@hredestig
Copy link
Contributor

The build plans use this version of esolver https://opencobra.github.io/pypi_cobrapy_travis/esolver.gz

perhaps try with that one?

@zakandrewking
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm on a Mac at the moment. Do you know what version that is? (thanks!)

@hredestig
Copy link
Contributor

Using QSopt_ex (SVN-version 2.5.10:, built Jan 8 2015-13:20:35)
Using EGlib (SVN-version 2.6.21:, built Jan 5 2015-17:59:18)

@zakandrewking
Copy link
Contributor Author

Same as me: 2.5.10

Do you know why some of the travis checks passed and some failed on this esolver change? thank!

@hredestig
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, we don't install esolver on mac so those aren't affected

@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

Hey @zakandrewking, I'm trying to move along the open PRs. I'm in two minds about this one. On one hand, I'd like to cut out the old solvers from cobrapy as soon as possible. That means that there should be a proper optlang interface for the esolver. I'm not sure who would work on that but we can figure it out. On the other hand, this is a minute change and if it's still wanted I don't mind merging. What's your take on this now?

@zakandrewking
Copy link
Contributor Author

It's important to have at least one working exact solver, so we might as well keep esolver support here until optlang adopts it.

@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

That's fair. This PR suggests that esolver is currently broken in cobrapy, though?

@zakandrewking
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, to get it working with this version of esolver & COBRApy, I had to make this change.

@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

Can you please update your PR by rebasing onto the current devel branch? Let's see what the tests say then.

@zakandrewking
Copy link
Contributor Author

OK. Tests running.

@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

I cancelled the Mac builds since Linux didn't pass anyway.

@zakandrewking
Copy link
Contributor Author

ah, yeah, what i did must be somehow mac specific. i don't have time to figure out why it's doing that, so we can close the PR

@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

So we will soon have an interface to the GLPK exact solver in optlang (opencobra/optlang#145). That's, of course, where it should live. I'm closing this then and will remove the esolver in the near future. If you need the esolver back instead of GLPK exact, please raise it on the optlang side.

@Midnighter Midnighter closed this Nov 3, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants