What's the ros way of linting ros code?
For ros1 I have found roslint but it is unclear to me if this is the recommended way to lint ros code and if it is still maintained/supported (last commit from three years ago).
For ros2 I couldn't find any official lint solution.
Not sure if there is "the ROS way of linting". For your Python/C++ code you can basically use any standard Python/C++ linter.
In addition (when using ROS 1) I can highly recommend catkin_lint, which checks the package definition and notifies about issues like inconsistent dependency declarations or missing install commands (especially the later can save a lot of time when moving from a devel workspace to installing packages on the robot).
The ROS2 development guide explains the rules used. Link1 and Link2
There is a linter located in ament_lint to enforce some rules.
To run the linter automatically as part of the tests of the package (use BUILD_TEST):
depend on ament_lint_auto and ament_lint_common:
Src file example Package.xml
<test_depend>ament_lint_auto</test_depend>
<test_depend>ament_lint_common</test_depend>
2 lines to your CMakeLists: (with BUILD_TEST)
Src file example CMakeList
find_package(ament_lint_auto REQUIRED)
ament_lint_auto_find_test_dependencies()
Related
CAVEAT: If you would like to use Serverless Framework with Nix/NixOS, this is not the way to do it: the package you end up with is outdated, and (as stated below) it probably won't work anyway. See thread on NixOS Discourse.
Wanted to try out Serverless via nix-shell so I looked it up, ran the command
nix-shell -v -p nodePackages.serverless
a̶n̶d̶ i̶t̶ w̶o̶r̶k̶s̶ f̶l̶a̶w̶l̶e̶s̶s̶l̶y̶.1
What makes this possible without requiring me to install Node manually to be able to run npm install -g serverless? (E.g., Is the node_modules folder somewhere in the Nix store? What happens if I nix-shell another Node package - will they share that same directory?)
[1]: It does not... See this Reddit thread; probable setuid issue. Still interested in the behind the scene stuff though.
This question is more like a todo because I really would like to figure it out myself but don't have the time for it right now...
This is possible because it was packaged with node2nix. This tool generates expressions that fetch the various packages and put them in a node_modules directory.
Indeed it's not perfect and some package need some extra fixing up to make them work well. The node2nix tooling could 'learn' from the cabal2nix integration in Nixpkgs to improve the quality of packaging and the Nixpkgs developer experience.
So, I am working on an embedded project for a cortex m7 microcontroller (ATSAME70Q21). The code is written in Atmel Studio 7, but I want to build it in a Debian environment through Docker (gcc docker image is Debian-buster based if I'm not mistaken) so that I can work in a Continuous Integration workflow.
At the moment I am trying to manually construct a Makefile, based on the generated makefile by the IDE, but that seems like the wrong way to handle this problem. Maybe I am too tunnel-visioned to notice different solutions. So I would like some help from folks who maybe have struggled with this problem before.
Thanks in advance.
I solved this problem the following way by mimicking the output of Atmelstudio into a CMakeLists file.
First I analyzed the generated makefile from the debug build to discover what files were built, what compiler flags were used and what programs were called.
Then I compared the generated makefile from the release build with the debug build to discover the differences.
With this information, I made a CMake file. For now, I GLOB_RECURSE all my source files, but I could crawl the Atmelstudio *.cproj file to find out what files are required.
This might not be the ideal answer, but it solves my problem.
I would like to utilize pipenv as my virtual environment manager and for my dependency management for my Python cdk projects, upon running 'cdk init'. I read that you can specify a 'custom' application template but could not find documentation on creating one. Is it possible and can the virtual environment/dependency manager be controlled using this feature?
I would like to be able to run 'cdk init hello-world --language python' and have the scaffolding for the project be generated BUT using pipenv.
It's not possible to do that without modifying the source code for the CDK package itself. You likely won't want to manage your own divergent version of the standard package.
I've shoe-horned CDK to work with PipEnv a couple of times, and it's more work than it's worth at this point. The problem is that PipEnv forces the . delimiter in the package name to a -; pipenv install aws-cdk.aws-rds is listed as aws-cdk-aws-rds in the Pipfile, and the package installations don't actually work.
There's an open issue on the repo for this though (https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/issues/3671), so you could +1 there in hopes that they can address it. It really is an issue with Pipenv though.
Following the link from Scott for the open issue, it looks like this works now, provided the package name is in quotes.
I've read the .travis.yml in the agda-stdlib project, while it's very different and complex from a simple library that was written in Agda purely (without those Haskell codes and Shell scripts).
I'm confused with the stdlib's .tarvis.yml. I've installed agda via cabal install, but the stdlib is trying to clone and compile Agda on Travis CI, and there're a lot of commands that seems to be irrealavent to building it.
Also, agda-stdlib seems to be available on Ubuntu's source. This could be the 3rd approach to install it.
Also, the stdlib doesn't have dependencies, but I have. I don't know how to add a dependency either.
Conclusion of my question:
In the 3 choices of installing agda listed above, which one should I choose?
How to add an dependency that let the agda compiler knows I'm actually using it?
The standard library is a bit of a special case: it evolves in lock-step with the development version of Agda. As such it is often the case that it cannot be compiled with a version of Agda readily available in your distribution of choice (e.g. because it uses syntax that was not available beforehand!) and it is forced to pull the latest version from github.
Installing Agda
If your library is compatible with a distributed version then it will be far simpler for you to simply pull it from the repositories via apt-get install agda.
Alternatively Scott Fleischman has a basic example on how to use a docker image to typecheck your development: https://github.com/scott-fleischman/agda-travis
Installing your dependencies
If your project relies on dependencies then you do need to install them. In practice it'll probably mean fetching a bunch of tarballs via wget, and having a ~/.agda/libraries pointing at their library files.
Cf. the manual on library management
I've been frustrated by the the CMake-CPack for almost one week.
The bad thing is the CMake-CPack online documentation does not document this part well.
After googling, I found this variables to use:
CPACK_PACKAGING_PREFIX # NOT documented
CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX # Documented, but the behavior seems weird
CPACK_INSTALL_PREFIX # NOT documented
CPACK_PACKAGE_INSTALL_DIRECTORY # Documented, but this variable does NOT work as the online document described
CPACK_PACKAGING_INSTALL_PREFIX # NOT documented
What I am trying to do is: package a Debian package using fakeroot make package, when the package is installed by sudo dpkg -i MyProgramPackageName, install it to /usr/local, with a subdirectory MyProgramPackageName. That is, all files should be installed under /usr/local/MyProgramPackageName-V.1.2.3.
I've been trying (CMake 2.8.3 and CMake 2.8.5) to tune these variables. I tried so many combinations, but failed.
The only way succeeded is:
Set(CPACK_PACKAGING_INSTALL_PREFIX /usr/local/MyProgramPackageName-V.1.2.3)
But this variable is NOT even documented, and the behavior cannot be guaranteed. If you are confused with my question, please advise me when to use CPACK_PACKAGE_INSTALL_DIRECTORY? because the documentation description about this variable is really attractive, and it is really what I want, but I just could not make it working.
Please advise me.
Peter
I didn't find any documentation to support this, but I did find some bug reports and email archives that seem to suggest that the following is what you should be doing:
set(CPACK_SET_DESTDIR true)
set(CPACK_INSTALL_PREFIX /opt/MySuperAwesomePrefix-v.1.2.3)
If CPACK_INSTALL_PREFIX is not set, it will default to CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX. Now relative paths from install(... DESTINATION dest) will end up as CPACK_INSTALL_PREFIX/dest inside your package file. This worked when I tried to generate a deb file.
The paths used by the CPACK are taken from the INSTALL directives in your CMakeLists.txt files. This allows the result package to mirror what a 'make install' would do. This keeps the CPACK configuration to a minimum.
So, from an example CMakeLists.txt file:
INSTALL(TARGETS ${APPLICATION} DESTINATION bin)
This will install to /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin. If you wanted to place it in a subdirectory you could do it here:
INSTALL(TARGETS ${APPLICATION} DESTINATION bin/myappdir)
Or entirely different directory:
INSTALL(TARGETS ${APPLICATION} DESTINATION /opt/foo/bar)