-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
RMW_LIBRARY_PATH patch creates issues when running without Bazel #57
Comments
Maybe something like:
|
I noticed this as well. Instead of extending the patch, I think it'd be better to remove it completely and instead get closer to the ROS standard setup. When we want to support more than just Cyclone, we will need some mechanism to switch the RMW implementation either way. Instead of inventing something new, sticking to the ROS default is the way to go IMHO. |
This is a valid point. What are your expectations? How would you like to do deployment of a ros2_launch app? Also, if you don't want to make a ros2_launch-like deployment, how would that look like on your end? In https://github.com/mvukov/rules_ros I also worked out cross-compilation, and there I also worked out https://github.com/mvukov/rules_ros/blob/main/third_party/packaging.bzl, see binary_pkg_tar rule. The intention there was to package a valid runfiles tree (that Bazel generates) in a way that it would work on a target machine. binary_pkg_tar rule piggy-backs on rules_docker (because this way works, and rules_pkg didn't work at that time). Didn't touch this in a while and it's very possible there is a simper solution. One of the issues with rules_pkg is bazelbuild/rules_pkg#115. My way of thinking was/is: if we use |
The
rmw_implementation_library_path.patch
creates a nice experience when running via bazel, but it creates a lot of unecessary annoyance when running without. For example, it causes the node processes to look for thermw
lib inexternal/ros2_rmw_cyclonedds/librmw_cyclonedds.so
.I'm looking to improve this system a bit. Which solution would be acceptable for you?
What if I change the patch to first check at
RMW_LIBRARY_PATH
and if it's not there fall back to the normal code?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: