[ros-users] patch + packages for ccny_vision on natty

Piyush piyushk at gmail.com
Wed Oct 26 18:58:04 UTC 2011


I was a bit busy as well, and then I forgot. I'll try to put it
together tonight and send it in.

Piyush

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Ivan Dryanovski
<ivan.dryanovski at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Piyush,
>
> I haven't been able to look into this issue in much detail until now.
> I'd like to release a new patched version. Have you created a patch in
> accordance to Bill''s suggestions?
>
> Ivan
>
> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Piyush <piyushk at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Bill Morris <bill at iheartengineering.com> wrote:
>>> I am not sure this is the ideal solution.
>>>
>>> First a patch should probably be pushed upstream if possible. I emailed
>>> Philip Lamb at ARToolworks to see if they are accepting patches for the
>>> GPL version.
>>>
>>
>> This is an excellent point. Let me know if you hear back from Philip,
>> and whether the patch can be pushed to the main ARToolKit repository.
>>
>>> Second, I would prefer not modifying the tarball directly as it is
>>> supposed to be a snapshot of the ARToolkit SVN. I think the preferred
>>> route is to use patch and replace the patch_v4l kludge.
>>>
>>> It is probably clearer what something like the patch system for the
>>> canonical scan matcher is doing.
>>> ccny-ros-pkg/scan_tools/csm/Makefile
>>> ----
>>> patch:
>>> ifneq (,$(wildcard $(BUILD_DIR)/.patched))
>>>        @echo Patching CSM
>>>        cd $(SOURCE_DIR) && patch -p0 < ../../patch_a
>>>        cd $(SOURCE_DIR) && patch -p0 < ../../patch_b
>>>        cd $(SOURCE_DIR) && patch -p0 < ../../patch_c
>>>        touch $(BUILD_DIR)/.patched
>>> else
>>>        @echo CSM previously patched, use 'make wipe' to completely
>>> remove build directory.
>>> endif
>>>
>>> wipe: clean
>>>        rm -rf $(BUILD_DIR)
>>> ----
>>>
>>
>> This looks much better. I can rewrite this using 2 patch files - one
>> for the change the patch_v4l currently provides, and one for the the
>> v4l stuff. Is this ok with the guys at CCNY?
>>
>>> Is there a REP for third party packages?
>>>
>>> On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 17:59 -0500, Piyush wrote:
>>>> This is correct - the patch was only for Natty. For some weird reason
>>>> I assumed that the debs could be built externally without pushing this
>>>> change to the repository. It was a bad idea in the first place.
>>>>
>>>> I will see if I can work on this later tonight - the patch is still
>>>> relatively easy based on what Bill suggests, and will require
>>>> modifying ARToolKit's custom configuration script to provide the
>>>> LIBV4L1 flag as necessary.
>>>>
>>>> Piyush
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bill Morris <bill at iheartengineering.com>
>>> I Heart Engineering
>>> http://www.iheartengineering.com
>>> <3
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ros-users mailing list
>>> ros-users at code.ros.org
>>> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>>
>>
>> Piyush
>> _______________________________________________
>> ros-users mailing list
>> ros-users at code.ros.org
>> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users at code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>



More information about the ros-users mailing list