various improvements

[v4hn]

Spring cleaning of local patches we collected on our robot over time.

@knorth55 @davefeilseifer Could you please provide feedback/review?

I believe this workaround probably fixes issues reported here as well (though that could have referred to many other problems too).

[v4hn]

The last patch resolves some annoying build farm warnings @k-okada and I receive every now and then. It should be applied to various other code bases here as well.

[knorth55]

We are running our PR2 on noetic now, and the issue caused by the change that LD_LIBRARY_PATH is disable by setcap.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9843178/linux-capabilities-setcap-seems-to-disable-ld-library-path

I also found the solution in this PR from here.
shadow-robot/ros_ethercat#76
But, I remember that the change does not solve the issue. (probably, I almost forget...)

So I added /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ros-noetic.conf as below, and it works now.

/opt/ros/noetic/lib

But I did the change last may, so I don't remember the detail...
When I have time, I will check it on our PR2 + Noetic.

[knorth55]

@v4hn

Indigo's support cmake version is 2.8.11, and many PR2 are running in indigo.
I think it is better to use cmake 2.8.

(I know the warning mail from build.ros.org is annoying... :(
I have the same issue because audio_common uses cmake 2.8.)

https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-0003.html#indigo-igloo-may-2014

[v4hn]

Indigo's support cmake version is 2.8.11, and many PR2 are running in indigo. I think it is better to use cmake 2.8.

I would definitely argue that if somebody tries to use the kinetic-devel branch with ROS indigo, they are doing something very wrong. indigo was last released from the hydro-devel branch.

Don't you agree?

[v4hn]

I also found the solution in this PR from here.
shadow-robot/ros_ethercat#76
But, I remember that the change does not solve the issue. (probably, I almost forget...)

I believe it did solve the problem for us, but it has been a while as well and I can't check the system right now (not in the lab for two weeks). Please verify again on your system and if it really fails I will drop the respective commit here.

So I added /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ros-noetic.conf as below, and it works now.

That works as well, though I'm not sure whether it still works when all/some involved packages are built in a local workspace (as the case for us).

[knorth55]

Don't you agree?

I agree, but indigo-devel is 62 commits behind from the kinetic-devel.
So we need back-porting PR.

Also I know that @k-okada 's policy is to maitain one branch, which works for every repo.
So I think it is better to ask @k-okada 's opinion.

[knorth55]

Please verify again on your system and if it really fails I will drop the respective commit here.

OK, I will check it!

[knorth55]

@v4hn
I checked in our PR2, and this PR works!
we don't need to change /etc/ld.so.conf.d/.
Probably, I was doing wrong change.

[v4hn]

I agree, but indigo-devel is 62 commits behind from the kinetic-devel. So we need back-porting PR.

I agree, but this is free labor and I definitely don't feel responsible to keep current repositories running with 10-year-old distributions at the cost of annoyances for the maintainers.

Also I know that @k-okada 's policy is to maitain one branch, which works for every repo.
So I think it is better to ask @k-okada 's opinion.

Indeed, he set up travis for this repository with indigo as well. (Leaving aside that the travis configs are broken since github actions were introduced.)
I reworked the patch for now with more overhead.
We can work around the VERSION warning with

if(POLICY CMP0048)
  cmake_policy(SET CMP0048 NEW)
endif()

That still leaves the "cmake will not stay compatible with cmake <2.8.12 in the future" warning, that modern cmake versions report. ROS Indigo only required cmake 2.8.11 to support Ubuntu saucy (13.10). The only ROS indigo installations we might still consider build on Ubuntu trusty which bundles 2.8.12, so I bumped the version to 2.8.12 everywhere.

If you see @k-okada personally, please do talk to him about indigo vs (post-)noetic support.
I haven't seen him active on github issues in quite a while, though I expected he would join in with some discussions on ROS-O. He is active in the jsk repositories though, so I'm wasn't worried :) .

I checked in our PR2, and this PR works!
we don't need to change /etc/ld.so.conf.d/.
Probably, I was doing wrong change.

Good to hear 👍

[knorth55]

this is free labor and I definitely don't feel responsible to keep current repositories running with 10-year-old distributions at the cost of annoyances for the maintainers.

I agree.

I reworked the patch for now with more overhead.

@v4hn thank you !

If you see @k-okada personally, please do talk to him about indigo vs (post-)noetic support.
I haven't seen him active on github issues in quite a while, though I expected he would join in with some discussions on ROS-O. He is active in the jsk repositories though, so I'm wasn't worried :) .

I will talk to him.
He may be interested in ROS-O as jsk-ros-pkg/jsk_common#1770 (comment) .
We are also interested in ROS-O, because transition to ROS2 costs a lot.
If there is a doc to build deb for ROS-O + Ubuntu 22.04, I want to read the doc and set up the build and deb server.