Conversation
docker_templates/templates/docker_images_ros2/nightly/create_ros_image.Dockerfile.em
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| @[if 'rosdep' in locals()]@ | ||
| @[ if 'install' in rosdep]@ | ||
| @(TEMPLATE( | ||
| 'snippet/install_rosdep_dependencies.Dockerfile.em', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I went back to using the snipper here for consistency with other templates and config. I can revert back to e161765 if preferred
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we still need to --ignore-src? And how are we now --skip-keys?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we still need to --ignore-src?
Yes, without it we would install the debs for all the rosdep keys listed even if there is a version of the packages already built in the workspace.
In the case of the nightly image, this would result in downloading the crystal debs of all ROS packages listed as deps in ros2.repos.
And how are we now --skip-keys?
For the nightly, the following keys will still be needed:
- libopensplice69
- rti-connext-dds-5.3.1
Thy can be removed if we want to provide users with multiple rmw implementations
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thy can be removed if we want to provide users with multiple rmw implementations
I wouldn't be opposed to this. How much larger would this make the docker image? We'd have to add all that harry logic to accept RTI's debian installation. Also, does that licence prohibit distribution as an installed package? On the other hand, perhaps we should just let the user install it if they need it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the other hand, perhaps we should just let the user install it if they need it.
It seems it was the stand taken for all ROS 2 images so far. I'm fine providing only the default implementation in the image and rely on other to opt-in additional vendors (as opposed to opt-out).
I do not remember how permissive the licence of the RTI package is, I believe it is for non commercial purposes only and does not include some components like security plugins.
docker_templates/templates/docker_images_ros2/nightly/create_ros_image.Dockerfile.em
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
update rosdep in separate statement to allow none or multiple rule files use rosdep install like in other templates install ros-workspace to get ROS 2 setup files Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
a9c1a58 to
d573ce4
Compare
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
|
All blocking PRs have now been merged. THis has been rebased and is ready for review |
|
Is osrf/docker_images#245 still the latest incarnation of this nightly template? |
👍 |
I misread this, I believe we were referring to the same PR but just to be sure, the PR with the generated dockerfiles is osrf/docker_images#247 and not osrf/docker_images#245 |
Rebased and modified version of #49
This PR includes the commits of #51 #52 #53 #54
It builds on top of the commits from #49 and will replace #49
Once the PR it depends on it'll be rebased to include only the following changes
Relevant Changes:
99bf866 and 7331d8e
ros-ROS_DISTRO-ros-workspacepackage to get setup files 4ccbd61Resulting Dockerfile available at osrf/docker_images#247