>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Jack O'Quin <
jack.oquin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda
> > <
leo@alaxarxa.net> wrote:
> > > A Dimecres 03 Octubre 2012, Rich Mattes va escriure:
> > >> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Leopold Palomo Avellaneda
> > >> <
leo@alaxarxa.net>wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > First of all I have noticed that there are several packages that has
a
> > >> > dependency a pcl package, when there's no pcl package, but there's a
> > > system
> > >> > dependency pcl. So, I have to change several manifest files from
> > >> >
> > >> > <depend package="pcl" />
> > >> >
> > >> > to
> > >> > <rosdep name="pcl" />
> > >> >
> > >> > Also, I have not be able to found which version of pcl is needed for
> > > fuerte
> > >> > (1.5, 1.6) With 1.6 it doesn't compile.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> We had a lot of fun trying to figure this out in Fedora[1] as well. As
> > it
> > >> turns out, you can't use the upstream PCL release for Fuerte, you need
a
> > >> custom branch of PCL hosted on github[2] which contains extra message
> > >> definitions and stack metadata. I raised the issue upstream[3] and it
> > >> looks like we have to wait for PCL 2.0 for ROS to build against PCL as
a
> > >> stand-alone library instead of requiring that PCL be modified. We're
> > going
> > >> to try to patch Fedora's system PCL to make it a hybrid ROS stack and
> > >> stand-alone library so that ROS is usable until this situation is
> > resolved.
> > >> It seems this issue is pretty[4] common[5].
> > >
> > > Well, we want something similar. A PCL version stand-alone that could be
> > used
> > > by ros.
> > >
> > > I have seen the github code, and it doesn't seems that use the ROS
stuff,
> > > although is required by cmake. From a ROS full installation (188)
> > packages I
> > > have compiled 106, considering that pcl is not built or installed.
> > >
> > > I hope to have something functional some day ...
> >
> > So do I.
> >
> > Many people have stumbled over this problem in Fuerte. And, I fear it
> > may not get better in Groovy. I really hope I end up being wrong about
> > that.
> >
> > I think PCL must have fallen in the cracks during the Fuerte release.
> > Many of us expected catkin to solve the problem of building
> > stand-alone PCL with the ROS message tools. That only half worked.
> > Thanks to catkin, PCL can now optionally be built to use standard ROS
> > messages, such as sensor_msgs/PointCloud2. But unfortunately, PCL also
> > defines several ROS messages of its own: ModelCoefficients,
> > PointIndices, PolygonMesh, and Vertices, which cannot reasonably be
> > handled by the stand-alone PCL build. The changes to the PCL 1.5
> > sources were too large, messy and complex to merge into their
> > stand-alone tree.
> >
> > To ship a working Ubuntu version for Fuerte, the wg-debs/pcl github
> > project was created. Unfortunately, the main purpose of wg-debs is to
> > add the Debian rules and source control for several Ubuntu packages
> > hosted on
packages.ros.org because they are necessary rosdep
> > dependencies. Getting that to work for PCL involved significant
> > additional source changes, mostly defining those additional messages
> > and using them in PCL.
> >
> > That mostly solved the problem for Ubuntu systems. But, it leaves no
> > good solution for other Linux distros, Mac OSX, ARM boards, other
> > embedded systems, or anyone wanting to build everything from source.
> >
> > When PCL 2.0 comes out, it will only use PCL-defined types, no ROS
> > messages. So, these problems should eventually go away. Until then,
> > the ROS community needs to provide a PCL 1.x version that can be built
> > and installed from source on any of our target platforms. Then, the
> > Ubuntu Debian packages should be built from that. Unfortunately, that
> > will demand considerable maintenance effort including documentation,
> > with active Q&A support both here and on the PCL forums.
> >
> > Perhaps there is some clever way to repackage those additional ROS
> > messages into a catkin ROS package that a stand-alone PCL could
> > optionally build with, as it already does with std_msgs and
> > sensor_msgs when USE_ROS is specified for building. But, that seems to
> > be beyond my current catkin and PCL skills.
> > --
> > joq
> > _______________________________________________
> > ros-users mailing list
> >
ros-users@code.ros.org
> >
https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Tully Foote
>
tfoote@willowgarage.com
>
(650) 475-2827
>