rclcpp
nix-ros-overlay
rclcpp | nix-ros-overlay | |
---|---|---|
4 | 3 | |
492 | 168 | |
2.4% | - | |
9.1 | 8.9 | |
2 days ago | 3 days ago | |
C++ | Nix | |
Apache License 2.0 | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
rclcpp
-
How to use various QoS settings in ros2 used in moveit software?
I think there's an overload of rclcpp::action::create_client that will accept an rcl_action_client_options_t (see here https://github.com/ros2/rclcpp/pull/1133/files) but it looks like MoveGroupInterface doesn't pass anything in when it creates the action clients:
-
Making the jump to ROS2
So one of the bigger issues I've encountered is that re-entrant services can break with the multi-threaded executor https://github.com/ros2/rclcpp/issues/1212 Services in ROS2 by default are not reentrant meaning they need to be called asynchronously. Since my team was porting ROS1 nodes over we wanted to keep the old blocking service call behavior in ROS2 to avoid changing decision logic. Unfortunately, we found out that this can cause the node to crash per the issue above. The fix for that issue was implemented in Humble irc, but can't be ported back to foxy. That's one specific example, but we've seen a few other issues like that as well.
-
RADU: Motor Controller Software for Arduino and Raspberry Pico
Alternatively, you can use the default client libraries like rclpy or rclcpp for writing custom code that reads and writes ROS2 messages.
-
Nix is the ultimate DevOps toolkit
Thanks for the response!
> This is difficult to answer without knowing more details.
The situation specifically is the ROS ecosystem, where metadata is managed in these package.xml files:
https://github.com/ros2/rclcpp/blob/master/rclcpp/package.xm...
The federated nature of the ecosystem has led to a culture where it's very normal to be building dozens of these at once, in the same workspace together, often from multiple repos (the repo above has four in it). So there are several build tools which automate the work of examining a source workspace and building all the packages within it in the correct topological order, respecting build_depend tags. The newest of these tools (colcon) has actually made the package.xml optional in many cases, as it can examine CMakelists, setup.py, BUILD, etc, and discover for itself what the dependencies are.
Your "distribution" of ROS is formed by listing all the packages and repos in this big file, for which there is other tooling to manage pulling dependency sources, whatever: https://github.com/ros/rosdistro/blob/master/foxy/distributi...
Anyway, so the existing ROS/nix efforts (1) seem to basically consume all of this package/distribution metadata at once and generate a giant parallel structure of nix definitions (eg https://github.com/lopsided98/nix-ros-overlay/blob/master/di...), which I fear would be completely opaque to users and any system which required everyone to leave behind these existing workflows would be an immediate non-starter.
I think the ideal scenario (and what it would look like if I built this myself based on debs) would be that you could source the "base" workspace as usual (enter the nix-shell?), and check out source, build packages as usual with colcon, the usual workspace-building tool, but there'd be an extra plugin/verb/flag for it, which would make it build each package as a nix package instead of into the usual installspace. The verb would generate the nix definitions on the fly, and probably handle the invocation and build-parallelism side of it as well.
[1]: https://github.com/acowley/ros2nix, https://github.com/lopsided98/nix-ros-overlay
nix-ros-overlay
- tell me one thing you don't like about ROS
-
Package override not applying to Nix-shell / Cmake?
I believe this might be due to me also using the ROS overlay for Nix (https://github.com/lopsided98/nix-ros-overlay). Some packages that I'm using from ROS also require PCL, so I suspect that Nix might be ignoring my CUDA-enabled overlay and using the regular PCL package in order to meet the required dependencies. I'm not too sure how to confirm this...
-
Nix is the ultimate DevOps toolkit
Thanks for the response!
> This is difficult to answer without knowing more details.
The situation specifically is the ROS ecosystem, where metadata is managed in these package.xml files:
https://github.com/ros2/rclcpp/blob/master/rclcpp/package.xm...
The federated nature of the ecosystem has led to a culture where it's very normal to be building dozens of these at once, in the same workspace together, often from multiple repos (the repo above has four in it). So there are several build tools which automate the work of examining a source workspace and building all the packages within it in the correct topological order, respecting build_depend tags. The newest of these tools (colcon) has actually made the package.xml optional in many cases, as it can examine CMakelists, setup.py, BUILD, etc, and discover for itself what the dependencies are.
Your "distribution" of ROS is formed by listing all the packages and repos in this big file, for which there is other tooling to manage pulling dependency sources, whatever: https://github.com/ros/rosdistro/blob/master/foxy/distributi...
Anyway, so the existing ROS/nix efforts (1) seem to basically consume all of this package/distribution metadata at once and generate a giant parallel structure of nix definitions (eg https://github.com/lopsided98/nix-ros-overlay/blob/master/di...), which I fear would be completely opaque to users and any system which required everyone to leave behind these existing workflows would be an immediate non-starter.
I think the ideal scenario (and what it would look like if I built this myself based on debs) would be that you could source the "base" workspace as usual (enter the nix-shell?), and check out source, build packages as usual with colcon, the usual workspace-building tool, but there'd be an extra plugin/verb/flag for it, which would make it build each package as a nix package instead of into the usual installspace. The verb would generate the nix definitions on the fly, and probably handle the invocation and build-parallelism side of it as well.
[1]: https://github.com/acowley/ros2nix, https://github.com/lopsided98/nix-ros-overlay
What are some alternatives?
micro_ros_arduino - micro-ROS library for Arduino
rfcs - The Nix community RFCs
robotnix - Build Android (AOSP) using Nix [maintainer=@danielfullmer,@Atemu]
rosdistro - This repo maintains a lists of repositories for each ROS distribution
ros2_serial_example
haskell-nix - Nix and Haskell in production
nix-1p - A (more or less) one page introduction to Nix, the language.
asdf - Extendable version manager with support for Ruby, Node.js, Elixir, Erlang & more
rclpy - rclpy (ROS Client Library for Python)
nixos - NixOS Configuration
rosserial - A ROS client library for small, embedded devices, such as Arduino. See: http://wiki.ros.org/rosserial
nixpkgs - Nix Packages collection & NixOS