| ROS Resources: ROS Homepage | Media and Trademarks | Documentation | ROS Index | How to Get Help | Q&A Help Site | Discussion Forum | Service Status |
Anything released to Noetic is expected to have been ported already, including dynamic_reconfigure. If something doesn’t work with Python 3 then there’s a bug that needs to be fixed. The ROS Wiki UsingPython3 guide can help.
It looks like the links were to PRs that have already been merged and released; where is the dynamic_reconfigure script that’s not working with Python 3?
Yes I used those as examples of fixes that were made, many packages seem to deserve a similar treatment.
docker run -it --rm osrf/ros:noetic-desktop-full
root@330a6aa5201e:/opt/ros/noetic/lib# cd /opt/ros/noetic/lib
root@330a6aa5201e:/opt/ros/noetic/lib# grep -r "env python$" | wc -l
126
Here are some example of other packages needing to be patched:
class_loader/pull/158
common_tutorials/pull/26
geometry2/pull/466
geometry/pull/212
pluginlib/pull/197
qt_gui_core/pull/223
ros_controllers/pull/495
rqt_bag/pull/48
rqt_dep/pull/12
rqt_launch/pull/24
rqt_moveit/pull/7
rqt_msg/pull/10
rqt_nav_view/pull/6
rqt_pose_view/pull/7
rqt_publisher/pull/20
rqt_py_console/pull/9
rqt_reconfigure/pull/84
rqt_robot_monitor/pull/21
rqt_robot_steering/pull/9
rqt_runtime_monitor/pull/6
rqt_rviz/pull/14
rqt_service_caller/pull/16
rqt_shell/pull/12
rqt_srv/pull/5
rqt_tf_tree/pull/21
rqt_top/pull/9
rqt_topic/pull/18
rqt_web/pull/4
The PR on dynamic_reconfigure is here
My point here was more that this seems to be a pretty widespread issue, also present in packages maintained by core maintainers. As these maintainers are the most likely to follow the guidelines closely, it seems likely that future packages being released will face the same issue.
So I was wondering if there could be a way to give more visibility to the issue and give early feedback to releasers that their packages may have a problem before it hits the main repo.
Thank you for all those PRs @marguedas 
. I’ll make it a priority today to review these, and work with the maintainers to make releases.
I just tried docker run -it arm64v8/ros:noetic-robot on the RPi4 with armv8 enabled and it doesn’t work.
docker pull ros:noetic-robot
noetic-robot: Pulling from library/ros
no matching manifest for linux/arm/v8 in the manifest list entries
So no RPi support for the Noetic Docker images yet?
It looks like arm64/v8 image for that tag was pushed 10 days ago to the library registry
But it looks like your docker daemon is set for arm/v8. My guess is the missing 64 in the specified manifest to search for is causing issues for your docker client, or it’s implicitly searching for the 32-bit version somehow. Oddly enough there seems to be a issue with building the 32-bit images currently
https://doi-janky.infosiftr.net/job/multiarch/job/arm32v7/job/ros/
https://doi-janky.infosiftr.net/job/multiarch/job/arm32v7/job/ros/184/execution/node/239/log/
+1 This is likely a docker configuration issue
I have a RPi 4 running ubuntu 20.04 server aarch64 + docker from the docker apt repository and it can run ROS noetic images using out-of-the-box settings.
This one is likely due to Bug #1867675 “Install failure for libc6 2.31-0ubuntu6 on armhf” : Bugs : glibc package : Ubuntu
@sloretz friendly bump on this after 8 months, about half of the PRs listed above have not seen a Noetic release yet. Is it still a priority to get these released ? if not, how can I help getting these into the debs ?
Thanks!
11 posts were split to a new topic: Are there plans for a community supported ROS 1 release after Noetic?
Given the lack of response, I’m planning on tagging and releasing in Noetic the subset of packages above that have only python3 fixes since the last tagged release.
Please express oppositions here by then if this should not happen