ATSAS 2.6.0 fail in Mac OSX

ATSAS for Linux and Mac, general installation issues, ATSAS online etc.
Post Reply
Message
Author
Yann
Active member
Posts: 44
Joined: 2010.11.03 11:31
Location: Vrije Universiteit Brussel

ATSAS 2.6.0 fail in Mac OSX

#1 Post by Yann » 2014.11.28 17:10

Hi guys,

I just installed the new ATSAS, but it does not seem to be working.

For instance, when I try to run crysol, I get

dyld: Library not loaded: /Applications/ATSAS/lib/libsaxsdocument.1.dylib
Referenced from: /Applications/ATSAS_v2p6/bin/crysol
Reason: image not found
Trace/BPT trap: 5

Also, double-clicking any icon (e.g. primes) does not work.

I'm on a 64-bit kernel and on Mac OSX 10.9.5.

Could anyone help me out?

Thanks,

Yann

franke
Administrator
Posts: 408
Joined: 2007.08.10 11:09
Contact:

Re: ATSAS 2.6.0 fail in Mac OSX

#2 Post by franke » 2014.11.28 18:37

The package is not relocatable by itself and has to be installed in /Applications/ATSAS to work out of the box.
If you install anywhere else, you have to fixup the library search paths, either by some magic of DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH or by changing the library search path inside all binaries (you'll need xcode, otool and install_name_tool).

This is a Mac speciality, google the *tools above and you'll find a lot of comments and questions on this. My recommendation: get rid of any old version and install the latest to /Applications/ATSAS.

Have Fun.

Alex
Active member
Posts: 692
Joined: 2007.08.09 21:10
Location: Planet Earth

Re: ATSAS 2.6.0 fail in Mac OSX

#3 Post by Alex » 2014.11.28 19:28

any advises on how to keep a history of atsas installations on mac/linux then? e.g. on windows machine I have:
c:\atsas252\bin
c:\atsas260\bin
etc
Since all are on system path, the older would be picked up later.

is there are an easy way to have smth similar on mac/linux?

I want to do it mainly because of new undocumented changes in AutoRg which, if data quality is low, does not calculate any Rg as opposed to AutoRg from 2.5.2
The difference is especially noticeable when data is from HPLC-SAXS experiment.

To clarify my point, the following is the comparison of new and old AutoRg output on the same data frames from HPLC-SAXS run:
http://goo.gl/VY1JuP
Note, that I populated the points with zeros for frames where AutoRg complained about low data quality.

Thanks in advance,
Alex

Post Reply