A Dijous 04 Octubre 2012, Michael Janssen (CS Grad) va escriure:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Tully Foote <tfoote@willowgarage.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:50 AM, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda
<
leo@alaxarxa.net>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Tully,
> >>
> >> A Dijous 04 Octubre 2012, Tully Foote va escriure:
> >> > Thanks for contributing these resources It will help people looking to
> >> > use
> >> > debian greatly.
> >>
> >> I need to make some documentation. I hope soon.
> >>
> >> > If you'd like we could also work with you to try to merge debian
support
> >> > upstream. Our whole infrastructure could be extended to support debian
> >> > codenames as well as ubuntu ones. We don't have time to actively
support
> >> > Debian releases but patches in that direction would be accepted.
> >> > Related
> >> > to this we could consider providing your backports in the main ROS
repos
> >> > as
> >> > we do for Ubuntu.
> >>
> >> Perfect, my propose is to create some kind of debian-robotics derivative
> >> in
> >> the way to install easily ros/orocos/ whatever robotics software in a
> >> debian
> >> distro. I manage a group of boxes in a robotics' lab and it's a pain to
> >> maintain ROS in this boxes. It's easy (I doubt it also ...) if you have a
> >> ubuntu box and a monouser (or few users) but a multiuser box is ... uff.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Jack's spot on with respect to PCL. The problem is that PCL standalone
> >> > defines symbols which collide with the ROS messages. This is an
> >> > artifact
> >> > of the early development process, and can't be fixed without an api
> >> > breaking change on either side.
> >>
> >> thanks for the explanation. Now it's more clear.
> >>
> >> > To build the same version as in ROS see
> >> > this repository [1] It is a git-buildpackage repository with all the
> >> > tags
> >> > generated for Ubuntu, and can easily be extended for other debian
> >> > codenames
> >> > into sourcedebs.
> >>
> >> Ok I don't understand this. Are you saying that the repo [1] has a
version
> >> of
> >> the perception package that could compile with a stand-alone version of
> >> pcl?
> >>
> >> Otherwise it's not easy (at least for me) to create a debian (pure
Debian,
> >> not
> >> Ubuntu) package from that sources. It requires the catkin package and by
> >> now,
> >> waiting the fhs transition it's not easy to prepare.
> >
> >
> > Sorry I pointed to the wrong repo. This is the repo with the version of
pcl
> > integrated with ROS which we're using for groovy and fuerte now. It's
> > installs in close to fhs style. We've generated debian control files for
> > ubuntu, but you can use git-buildpackage's command generate-debian for
> > generating any of the pure debian codenames as well.
> >
> > https://github.com/ros-gbp/pcl-release
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> <rant mode>
> >> It's really so complicate to have a full ROS system in a no ubuntu box!!!
> >> </rant mode>
> >
> >
> > It's just as complicated on Ubuntu, we've just jumped through the hoops
> > already ;-)
> >
> > Tully
>
> Right now, I'm piggybacking on the packages that are being built for
> fuerte / precise, and they are working almost completely out of the
> box. The script that I posted a little big ago[1] is working with
> just some version number bumps to download the right python-* packages
> at the beginning.
IMHO it's better to rebuild the packages in a clean environment that
piggybacking, but it could be an option with python packages.
> I can get flann, swig-wx, and pcl compiling from
> the release repositories mentioned (again, the fuerte precise tags)
> with only minor changes (pcl for g++ 4.7 compilation changes, and
> swig-wx for autogen updates). From there right now I'm building the
> overlay the "normal" way, but I would love to have an entirely
> package-based install with a repository.
Be careful with pcl, as have been mentioned in the thread. My version of swig-
wx in the same of Debian Squeeze 1.3.40 but with the WxPython patch.
Now, I have seen the packages of github and I don't understand why ros-undelay
have been split in multiples packages and not an unique source package that
create a bunch o binary packages.
I will try to rebuild these packages for squeeze-backports, using the last tag
of fuerte of each git.
>
> Recently I've gotten my rosdep install to run cleanly on Debian by
> adding a bunch of new rules in rosdistro, and modifying rosdep and the
> targets.yaml to support multiple OSes, using a minor change to
> targets.yaml[2] and a couple line change to support the structure
> change in rosdep. So rosdep is looking on debian for the named
> gbpdistro packages (ros-fuerte-catkin, ros-fuerte-pcl).
you could add my yaml file with more dependencies.
> As another user who is trying to understand the hoops that need to be
> jumped through, I would love to see a document explaining the whole
> process of the build farm how it is set up right now. So far I have
> intuited that bloom does some git magic to make release repositories
> (reading the docs of bloom helped a lot with understanding this,
> especially [2]), which then get picked up by jenkins and built in a
> pbuilder environment. I haven't quite been able to get the jenkins
> job creation scripts working yet, which would help in building the
> whole repository on Debian instead. In theory, Debian should be the
> easiest system to get working with packages, next to Ubuntu since it's
> so closely related.
depends. Probably you are right, but IMHO the ros ubuntu packages are not a
very polished packages :-(
Regards,
Leo
--
--
Linux User 152692
Catalonia
(text/plain)