[ros-users] clarifying package installation 'best practices'?

[Mike Purvis]

As an OEM who ships a lot of robots to first-time ROS users, one of the
things I/we have thought about at Clearpath is exactly how to configure the
robots for the best combination of ease-of-production on our side,
ease-of-getting-started on the user's side, and ease-of-maintenance on the
user's side. The current state of affairs is:

   - Everything on the robots is installed from debs, from a combination of
   packages.ros.org (buildfarm) and packages.clearpathrobotics.com
   (in-house buildbot-ros builds).
   - An /etc/ros/setup.bash file falls through to
   /opt/ros/indigo/setup.bash. This is what is sourced for the robot_upstart
   job which brings up the base software.
   - The homedir is populated with a README file explaining how to create a
   workspace with a new package in it...
   - ... and further how to change that "master" setup.bash, in the event
   that your new package contains nodelets, plugins, or things you want to
   launch as part of the robot_upstart background job.
   - Because all the "system" software is installed from debs, upgrading is
   a fairly sane update/dist-upgrade story.
   - But, if there's a repo of special customization
   launchers/URDF/whatever that's specific to that one platform, it is
   configured as a package and placed in a source workspace in the homedir.
   - The desktop and simulator software is also distributed as debs, and so
   provide a sane story for getting started on the user's supporting computer
   (but if the user wants the meshes or other stuff from a customization
   package, it must be manually copied over, le sigh).

We also resell a number of other vendors' products, and many do not make it
any farther than a source workspace for everything— often with a manual
apt-get step for dependencies (rather than using rosdep). On the one hand,
this is perhaps easier for hacking on and exploring the platform's own
software, but it sucks for pretty much everything else.

Anyhow, if anyone's interested in these issues or has thoughts about how to
improve the state of affairs for OEMs or users of OEM robots, please get in
touch off-list, would love to discuss further; at some point we could also
consider establishing a SIG for vendors. In any case, I can be found at
mpurvis at clearpathrobotics.com

M.

On 4 March 2015 at 07:42, Jonathan Bohren <jonathan.bohren at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think this is a great idea. I can't say the likelihood that this gets
> added to the wiki, but I'd be happy to accept a PR to add this to
> http://rosindex.github.io
>
> https://github.com/rosindex/rosindex/issues/142
>
> -j
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015, 03:44 G.A. vd. Hoorn - 3ME <
> g.a.vanderhoorn at tudelft.nl> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>>
>> just wondering whether we should somehow clarify what the current 'best
>> practices' are for installing packages onto a ROS pc. I see a lot of
>> people that assume that building from source (after cloning from a
>> repository) is _the_ way to do things.
>>
>> Apart from the fact that this is essentially a waste of time and effort,
>> it also often leads to problems (as they forget to check for and / or
>> install all dependencies first), which then results in numerous ROS
>> Answers questions. Having the sources locally also seems to invite some
>> users to start editing / hard coding parameters (such as IPs / serial
>> ports) into nodes, which is obviously unwanted.
>>
>> Somehow I have a feeling that the prominent placing of the repository
>> URL in the Package Summary contributes to the confusion.
>>
>> Would it perhaps be an idea to add a one-liner to the 'Package Summary'
>> on wiki pages of released packages that shows users how to install it
>> ("Installation: sudo apt-get install ros-$release-pkg-name", although
>> that is distribution specific)? Or a link to a (new) wiki page that
>> explains how to install packages in general (with the from-source option
>> shown last)?
>>
>>
>> Gijs
>> _______________________________________________
>> ros-users mailing list
>> ros-users at lists.ros.org
>> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users at lists.ros.org
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ros.org/pipermail/ros-users/attachments/20150304/1261f94b/attachment.html>