Fix symlink install versioned shared library

[JafarAbdi]

Fix #214

From doing some online research I found that the versioning extension is just for shared libraries in Linux so the other checks don't need any change

[dirk-thomas]

Please see my comment on the original ticket about a simple wildcard to be marching to broadly. Instead use a now specific regex to only capture the intended version suffices.

[JafarAbdi]

@dirk-thomas Sorry for the delay again does the following regex ok .? \.so(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?$ I'm not an regex expert but I think this should works, see for testing

EDIT: Found a better one ^\\.so(\\.[0-9]+)*$ (Thanks to @nbbrooks) and it turned out that I have to use double-backslashs see

[dirk-thomas]

You can simplify your regex without allowing an arbitrary amount of version parts (e.g. .1.2.3.4 shouldn't pass according to your original test examples): \.so(\.\d+){0,3}

[nbbrooks]

If we don't want to allow multiple .#, then how about
\.so(\.\d+)?$

[JafarAbdi]

@dirk-thomas CMake regex doesn't support curly brackets see

[JafarAbdi]

If we don't want to allow multiple .#, then how about
\.so(\.\d+)?$

It should only pass the following extensions .so, .so.major, .so.major.minor, or .so.major.minor.patch

[nbbrooks]

Gotcha. In that case, without curly braces support I think your initial solution works best.

[JafarAbdi]

Example with the last updated regex

cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 3.1.3)
project(testing_project)

set(exts
	".so.1100"
	".so.1.2.4"
	".so.10.2.4"
	".so.1.20.4"
	".so.1.2.40"
	".so.2.1"
	".so.2.1.2.1.2"
	".sos.2"
	".sos"
	".so"
	".so.1"
	".so.2.0.0"
	".so.1.s"
	"sso.1.s"
	".so.s.1"
	".so.1.2.s"
)

foreach(ext ${exts})
    if(ext MATCHES "\.so(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?$")
    	message("Pass: ${ext}")
    else()
    	message("Fail: ${ext}")
    endif()
endforeach()

The output

Pass: .so.1100
Pass: .so.1.2.4
Pass: .so.10.2.4
Pass: .so.1.20.4
Pass: .so.1.2.40
Pass: .so.2.1
Fail: .so.2.1.2.1.2
Fail: .sos.2
Fail: .sos
Pass: .so
Pass: .so.1
Pass: .so.2.0.0
Fail: .so.1.s
Fail: sso.1.s
Fail: .so.s.1
Fail: .so.1.2.s

[JafarAbdi]

Why the Fpr__ament_cmake__ubuntu_focal_amd64 check fails .?

[dirk-thomas]

Why the Fpr__ament_cmake__ubuntu_focal_amd64 check fails .?

Unfortunately the PR testing for Foxy isn't working yet. You can ignore that status. I will trigger a set of manual CI builds once the patch is ready.

[dirk-thomas]

CI Linux build:

[dirk-thomas]

Thanks for the improvement.

[ivanpauno]

I'm locally getting errors like:

CMake Warning (dev) at ament_cmake_symlink_install_targets_0_.cmake:1 (ament_cmake_symlink_install_targets):
  Syntax error in cmake code at

    /home/ivanpauno/ros2_ws/build/tracetools/ament_cmake_symlink_install/ament_cmake_symlink_install.cmake:243

  when parsing string

    \.so(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?$

  Invalid escape sequence \.

  Policy CMP0010 is not set: Bad variable reference syntax is an error.  Run
  "cmake --help-policy CMP0010" for policy details.  Use the cmake_policy
  command to set the policy and suppress this warning.
Call Stack (most recent call first):
  ament_cmake_symlink_install/ament_cmake_symlink_install.cmake:320 (include)
  cmake_install.cmake:41 (include)
This warning is for project developers.  Use -Wno-dev to suppress it.

Though I don't see that in the CI logs.

[JafarAbdi]

@ivanpauno Does replacing it with \\.so(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?$ gives the error .?

[ivanpauno]

@ivanpauno Does replacing it with \\.so(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?(\.[0-9]+)?$ gives the error .?

Yeah, I've tried same error.

[JafarAbdi]

@ivanpauno Could you please share the instruction to reproduce it .?

[dirk-thomas]

See #217 for the fix.

[dirk-thomas]

Could you please share the instruction to reproduce it

As the output above shows the CMake warning appears when building the tracetools package.