Ask Your Question

pcl_ros build error in Fuerte on Fedora 17 x64

asked 2012-09-05 14:36:22 -0500

updated 2012-09-09 00:15:32 -0500

Followed the instructions for Fuerte installation on Fedora, but stuck on pcl_ros compilation with errors similar to:

/opt/ros/fuerte/include/message_filters/sync_policies/approximate_time.h:620:119: error: ‘value’ is not a member of ‘ros::message_traits::TimeStamp’

Looks like incompatibility between ROS core libraries and pcl_ros. Where I am wrong?


  • Fedora 17 x86_64 RFRemix
  • pcl.x86_64 1.5.1-2.fc17 (installed by yum)
  • perception_pcl 1.2.3 (pulled by rosinstall)

Full log is here (see lines 12, 13, 23 for errors)

EDIT: Tried several versions from wg-deps with no result.

The package is configured as:


Still it gives same 3 errors during pcl_ros compilation.

Although I found a temporary solution - convert Ubuntu DEB package with alien to RPM - I am still interested in building native package. Probably need some black magic.

EDIT #2: It all the same.

There is a strange thing in PCL sources, in common/CMakeLists.txt to handle ROS build there is a code which excludes PointIndicies.h header from build:

    set(incs ${incs}


    set(std_msg_incs include/std_msgs/Header.h)
endif(NOT USE_ROS)

However this header is then used in common/include/pcl_base.h and there is nothing in it to handle such situation.

At the same time PCL builds without any problems, but pcl_ros is complaining for a missed header PointIndicies.h

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete

1 Answer

Sort by » oldest newest most voted

answered 2012-09-05 16:57:10 -0500

joq gravatar image

updated 2012-09-07 12:55:28 -0500

It looks like you used the stand-alone PCL 1.5.1 install package.

The pcl_ros package requires a special PCL build, containing some different header definitions and messages not included in the stand-alone version.

EDIT: it should depend on stand-alone PCL, but it does not. See PCL issue 669 for details.

I believe the ros-fuerte-pcl Debian package is built from this repository.

EDIT #2: glad alien was useful.

I agree that building yourself would be better. Probably, it looks similar to a normal stand-alone PCL build, but with the USE_ROS parameter set. This is my guess (not tested):

$ mkdir build
$ cd build
$ cmake .. -DUSE_ROS=1
$ make 
$ sudo make install
edit flag offensive delete link more


But isn't it that pcl in Fuerte _should be_ standalone as mentioned in Ch.4 (Migration) ? Also the link from to svn is broken, though I found some version of perception_pcl for fuerte, still there is no pcl inside and it gives same errors

Boris gravatar image Boris  ( 2012-09-05 17:51:25 -0500 )edit

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account.

Add Answer

Question Tools

1 follower


Asked: 2012-09-05 14:36:22 -0500

Seen: 411 times

Last updated: Sep 09 '12