feat: add cartographer patch

[wep21]

add patch for cartographer because abseil update breaks its build.

[wep21]

@Tobias-Fischer @traversaro cartographer is marked as skipped, but built in ci. Has vinca behavior changed after RoboStack/vinca#67?

[Tobias-Fischer]

My best guess is that’s a transitive dependency of another package - I’m only on my phone so can’t look in detail

[traversaro]

My best guess is that’s a transitive dependency of another package - I’m only on my phone so can’t look in detail

I think it is a transitive dependency of the turtlebot3 package.

[traversaro]

By bringing the patch from https://github.com/RoboStack/ros-humble/blob/main/patch/ros-humble-cartographer-ros.patch, I was able to get a different error:

-- Found ZLIB: /home/traversaro/ros-jazzy/output/bld/rattler-build_ros-jazzy-cartographer-ros_1744988768/host_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeh/lib/libz.so (found version "1.3.1")
CMake Error at /home/traversaro/ros-jazzy/output/bld/rattler-build_ros-jazzy-cartographer-ros_1744988768/host_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeh/lib/cmake/protobuf/protobuf-targets.cmake:42 (message):
  Some (but not all) targets in this export set were already defined.

  Targets Defined: protobuf::libprotobuf-lite, protobuf::libprotobuf,
  protobuf::libprotoc, protobuf::protoc

  Targets not yet defined: protobuf::libupb, protobuf::protoc-gen-upb,
  protobuf::protoc-gen-upbdefs, protobuf::protoc-gen-upb_minitable

Call Stack (most recent call first):
  /home/traversaro/ros-jazzy/output/bld/rattler-build_ros-jazzy-cartographer-ros_1744988768/host_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeh/lib/cmake/protobuf/protobuf-config.cmake:16 (include)
  CMakeLists.txt:53 (find_package)

[traversaro]

@Tobias-Fischer @traversaro cartographer is marked as skipped, but built in ci. Has vinca behavior changed after RoboStack/vinca#67?

Sorry, I think there was a bit of confusion. cartographer is skipped as it is built in conda-forge, what is being built (as a transitive dependency of turtlebot3) is cartographer_ros.

[traversaro]

By bringing the patch from https://github.com/RoboStack/ros-humble/blob/main/patch/ros-humble-cartographer-ros.patch, I was able to get a different error:

-- Found ZLIB: /home/traversaro/ros-jazzy/output/bld/rattler-build_ros-jazzy-cartographer-ros_1744988768/host_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeh/lib/libz.so (found version "1.3.1")
CMake Error at /home/traversaro/ros-jazzy/output/bld/rattler-build_ros-jazzy-cartographer-ros_1744988768/host_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeh/lib/cmake/protobuf/protobuf-targets.cmake:42 (message):
  Some (but not all) targets in this export set were already defined.

  Targets Defined: protobuf::libprotobuf-lite, protobuf::libprotobuf,
  protobuf::libprotoc, protobuf::protoc

  Targets not yet defined: protobuf::libupb, protobuf::protoc-gen-upb,
  protobuf::protoc-gen-upbdefs, protobuf::protoc-gen-upb_minitable

Call Stack (most recent call first):
  /home/traversaro/ros-jazzy/output/bld/rattler-build_ros-jazzy-cartographer-ros_1744988768/host_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeh/lib/cmake/protobuf/protobuf-config.cmake:16 (include)
  CMakeLists.txt:53 (find_package)

In the patch there was a spurious find_package(Protobuf CONFIG) that I am not sure why it was there. By removing, it seems that it is building fine.

[traversaro]

The CI seems happy, if the Windows one is also happy I will merge to hopefully fix #43 and #44 .

[Tobias-Fischer]

I’d be happy to merge despite the Windows failure and tackle it afterwards?

[traversaro]

I’d be happy to merge despite the Windows failure and tackle it afterwards?

Ok! At this stage anything that builds some more packages is good to go!