On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Ankur,
Thanks for going over these. The question you raised about what should own /etc/ros provides an interesting issue. I think we should make a ros-release package that owns /etc/ros, provides RPM macros that define which ros release the distro supports (i.e. electric, fuerte, groovy, etc.) and is required by all of the other ROS subpackages. I was looking at the fedora-release package this morning, I'm going to take a crack at a ros-release package tonight and put it up for review. This implies that we're only going to support one ROS release per fedora version, but I think this is the right route take (interested parties can install to /opt if they want a different version than the one we provide). It also implies once we pick a rosditro for el6, we're stuck with it or we break the world by upgrading the entire rosdistro. Without reviewing additional compatibility packages, i don't see any way around that anyway.
In the meantime, have a look at the ros packages I've got up on my fedorapeople page[1]. They're based on the current release of the ros fuerte underlay packages as defined in [2]. I've made some minor tweaks to make some of the installation paths more sane, and some tweaking is probably still in order for catkin to install things to /usr/lib64 instead of hardcoding /usr/lib everywhere. I've gotten as far as ros-comm, which is a huge and needs to be split up into several subpackages. The work that Tom has done on multi-package stacks at [3] can serve as a guide on how to handle that split. I think it would be best to pick up with the base packages for now and see if you find any issues with the currently packaged ones, and then try to pick up with ros-comm. If there are going to be multiple people working on this, we should probably set up some sort of git repository with our spec files and patches so we can more easily coordinate.
Rich
[1] http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/rospackages/
[2] http://ros.org/rosinstalls/fuerte-ros-full.rosinstall
[3] http://spot.fedorapeople.org/ros/SRPMS/
On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 14:30 +1000, Ankur Sinha wrote:Hi Rich, folks,
> Yeah. Sure! I've taken over some of the review tickets. I should be
> able
> to start reviewing them early next week.
I've reviewed the three/four open tickets. Please feel free to ping me
if there are any others that need attention. I'll see if I can package
up some of the other components when I find the time.
Hi Ankur,
Thanks for going over these. The question you raised about what should own /etc/ros provides an interesting issue. I think we should make a ros-release package that owns /etc/ros, provides RPM macros that define which ros release the distro supports (i.e. electric, fuerte, groovy, etc.) and is required by all of the other ROS subpackages. I was looking at the fedora-release package this morning, I'm going to take a crack at a ros-release package tonight and put it up for review. This implies that we're only going to support one ROS release per fedora version, but I think this is the right route take (interested parties can install to /opt if they want a different version than the one we provide). It also implies once we pick a rosditro for el6, we're stuck with it or we break the world by upgrading the entire rosdistro. Without reviewing additional compatibility packages, i don't see any way around that anyway.
In the meantime, have a look at the ros packages I've got up on my fedorapeople page[1]. They're based on the current release of the ros fuerte underlay packages as defined in [2]. I've made some minor tweaks to make some of the installation paths more sane, and some tweaking is probably still in order for catkin to install things to /usr/lib64 instead of hardcoding /usr/lib everywhere. I've gotten as far as ros-comm, which is a huge and needs to be split up into several subpackages. The work that Tom has done on multi-package stacks at [3] can serve as a guide on how to handle that split. I think it would be best to pick up with the base packages for now and see if you find any issues with the currently packaged ones, and then try to pick up with ros-comm. If there are going to be multiple people working on this, we should probably set up some sort of git repository with our spec files and patches so we can more easily coordinate.
Rich
[1] http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/rospackages/
[2] http://ros.org/rosinstalls/fuerte-ros-full.rosinstall
[3] http://spot.fedorapeople.org/ros/SRPMS/
_______________________________________________ robotics mailing list robotics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/robotics
