On 11.01.2012 16:09, Rich Mattes wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Brennan Ashton <bashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>> As was brought up again on the Fedora Packaging list, ROS is still not
>> part of Fedora due to some serious build structure issues.
I'd really like to see this in Fedora and I'd help out.
> I'm interested in helping to get ROS into Fedora, but I think it's going to
> be difficult to get it to conform to the FHS and the Fedora packaging
> guidelines. Right now it looks like the Ubuntu packages for ROS are
> dumping everything into /opt, which isn't going to fly for packages
> included in Fedora's repositories. The other option is collaborating with
> WG and letting them host their own packages with everything in /opt, but
> that puts a large burden on them for making sure all of the builds are up
> to date as the dependencies in Fedora change.
Since Nathan from WG proposed the inclusion we might have someone who is
willing to do this. Nathan, would this be an option?
> Another other issue is that there are no tarball releases. All of the
> source packages live in svn, so we'd be perpetually taking svn snapshots as
> our package source. It looks like there are version numbers being tagged
> so maybe this is a tractable problem.
If we stick to the stable releases we shold be good, basically package
up "Electric" and be good, the package version in the distribution
change not that often and this is then clearly announced on their
website. So once we have a baseline maintenance should be low, only for
full releases you had quite some work on your hands.
> I think the biggest issue is the FHS stuff, if we can resolve that then
> there's a clear way forward for packaging. If I am way off base or missing
> something please discuss.
I think you're right for "real" inclusion in Fedora. Anyway, for just
having the ability to easily install ROS for the start a WG-hosted
solution would be fine if there were sufficient support from their side.
We can offer a mirror here if its about network capacity, but build
infrastructure would have to be at WG.
I wonder if there is a way to get our own "f16-ros" tag in Koji (that is
not and cannot be pushed to f16[-updates]), so that we can at least use
all the build infrastructure and do not have to duplicate this. Any idea
which committee would be the one to talk to about this, is there a wiki
page already denying this in general? Has this been brought up before?
Nathan, do have you hardware and time to devote to Fedora builds? How
does it work for the Debian/Ubuntu builds, are they done manually, or by
hand? Who maintains the system?
Tim
--
Tim Niemueller <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> www.niemueller.de
=================================================================
Imagination is more important than knowledge. (Albert Einstein)
_______________________________________________
robotics mailing list
robotics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/robotics
