ROS Resources: Documentation | Support | Discussion Forum | Index | Service Status | ros @ Robotics Stack Exchange |
2018-07-06 16:20:05 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |
2016-12-20 03:09:45 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |
2016-11-19 14:56:57 -0500 | received badge | ● Taxonomist |
2016-10-08 15:12:48 -0500 | commented answer | Turtlebot Spinning That can only be done by the original poster. |
2016-10-08 15:12:25 -0500 | received badge | ● Enthusiast |
2016-10-07 06:48:51 -0500 | commented answer | Turtlebot Spinning Thanks, that fixed the problem for me. The question is, whether this is a problem.
|
2016-09-14 03:57:28 -0500 | commented question | Turtlebot-Gazebo-Demo: Gazebo sends wrong timestamps. I created an gazebo issue. |
2016-09-14 03:57:10 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |
2016-09-13 04:11:23 -0500 | commented question | turtlebot gazebo TF_OLD_DATA I debugged my problem a little bit more and created another question, as I use Kinetic and Gazebo 7. Here is my post. Maybe it is the same in your situation?! |
2016-09-13 04:09:46 -0500 | asked a question | Turtlebot-Gazebo-Demo: Gazebo sends wrong timestamps. Hi all, I get some warnings when I start the turtlebot gazebo amcl demo. Here is the warning: Here is what I use:
By debugging the problem with roswtf, rqt_tf_tree_view, rostopic echo, etc. , I now know that AMCL is publishing the following tf message sometimes: The rosparam use_sim_time is set to true. I am not so sure why this happens, or whether there is a bug in the amcl_demo.launch configuration, or even in amcl? Any help is welcome. :) EDIT: I further debugged it and traced the wrong time stamp back to gazebo. The gazebo_ros_openni_kinect plugin sends these timestamps. But I don't know why this is happening. Greetings, Stephan |
2016-09-12 09:05:59 -0500 | commented question | turtlebot gazebo TF_OLD_DATA I have the same problem. |
2016-09-12 09:05:59 -0500 | received badge | ● Commentator |
2016-01-07 05:37:32 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |
2015-09-03 04:09:53 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |
2015-07-13 10:56:06 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |
2015-07-09 11:30:08 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |
2015-07-08 14:30:14 -0500 | asked a question | No qt_build in ROS Jade? Hi, will there be a version of qt_build in Jade? Or how do I replace it? Greetings, Stephan Edit Thanks for the solutions. I actually didn't made it work with Qt5, because of some changes in namespaces between Qt4 and Qt5. So my solution is based on CMake's Documentation about Qt4. This is probably quite similar to you answer, so I marked it as a solution. Thanks for your help! |
2015-06-26 02:37:39 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |
2015-06-26 02:35:34 -0500 | edited question | How to get an YUV422 Image with camera1394? Hi Community, we would like to use the camera1394 package, but we are unable to directly get an YUV422 coded Image from it, without conversion from RGB (or the like) to YUV422. Any hints, examples are welcome! UPDATE After a year, we asked the same question again and got a final answer: http://answers.ros.org/question/21153... |
2015-06-26 02:33:05 -0500 | marked best answer | catkin_make clean Is there a way to clean a certain package with catkin_make? |
2015-06-23 15:58:40 -0500 | commented answer | camera 1394 uses wrong video mode @joq: Good to know. It absolutely wasn't clear for us, that ROS actually does not support to transmit YUV422 encoded images. We already have a software which is using libdc1394. Our initial motivation to use ROS was to save the effort for adapting our software in case of an update in the libdc1394 |
2015-06-20 03:02:18 -0500 | commented answer | camera 1394 uses wrong video mode @joq: How do we get and yuv422 encoded image? We don't want to have an RGB8 encoded image, which means that the conversion is absolutely unnecessary! |
2015-06-08 03:07:58 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |
2015-06-08 02:10:52 -0500 | answered a question | catkin_make vs. catkin build for CGAL With a lot of help from JBohren, this has been fixed. See: https://github.com/catkin/catkin_tool... |
2015-06-05 19:09:44 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Question (source) |
2015-06-05 10:38:25 -0500 | received badge | ● Editor (source) |
2015-06-05 10:36:22 -0500 | asked a question | catkin_make vs. catkin build for CGAL Hi all, I have a ROS package, which did work, when I compiled it with "catkin_make". It still compiles with "catkin build" (see catkin_tools), but it does not run anymore. The created executable is using CGAL, and that library is complaining about some rounding issue, when I compile it with "catkin build". Here is the runtime error: Does anybody has a clue, why catkin build breaks it? Here is my CMakeLists.txt: |
2014-11-28 10:13:37 -0500 | commented answer | Optional Fields in ROS Messages Hi, it is 2 years later now. Any update about that topic? I currently had the same issue as James :) |
2014-10-23 10:56:22 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |
2014-06-30 03:07:37 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |
2014-05-04 23:26:24 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |