Skip to content

Remove deprecated boost functions (fix build error on Rolling)#199

Merged
sloretz merged 1 commit intoros2from
sloretz/remove_boost_functions
Aug 5, 2020
Merged

Remove deprecated boost functions (fix build error on Rolling)#199
sloretz merged 1 commit intoros2from
sloretz/remove_boost_functions

Conversation

@sloretz
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@sloretz sloretz commented Aug 5, 2020

This PR Removes PLUGINLIB__DISABLE_BOOST_FUNCTIONS and the deprecated functions it wraps.
This should fix this downstream PR job failure in the ros2/urdf repo: http://build.ros2.org/job/Rpr__urdf__ubuntu_focal_amd64/4 .

--- stderr: urdf
In file included from /tmp/ws/src/urdf/urdf/src/model.cpp:39:
/opt/ros/rolling/include/pluginlib/class_loader.hpp:55:10: fatal error: boost/shared_ptr.hpp: No such file or directory
   55 | #include <boost/shared_ptr.hpp>
      |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compilation terminated.

The cause appears to be PLUGINLIB__DISABLE_BOOST_FUNCTIONS not being defined by default, meaning class_loader.hpp tries to include a boost header by default. However, pluginlib neither exports boost as a dependency in its CMakeLists.txt nor declares it in its package.xml. Since the deprecation appears to have been added in 2017 I think it's fair to remove it.

244f065#diff-ca2b6071ef290a8731c40a238f8e40a8R41

Removes PLUGINLIB__DISABLE_BOOST_FUNCTIONS
Fixes downstream missing include with rolling distro

Signed-off-by: Shane Loretz<sloretz@openrobotics.org>
Signed-off-by: Shane Loretz <sloretz@osrfoundation.org>
@sloretz sloretz added the bug label Aug 5, 2020
@sloretz sloretz self-assigned this Aug 5, 2020
@sloretz
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

sloretz commented Aug 5, 2020

CI ( build: --packages-above-and-dependencies pluginlib test: --packages-select pluginlib )

  • Linux Build Status
  • Linux-aarch64 Build Status
  • macOS Build Status
  • Windows Build Status

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@wjwwood wjwwood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm, I think this must have been broken at some point. I can't find where though. It should have been part of the extras or something.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants