Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handle changed ntpath.isabs behaviour in Python 3.13 (#110) #112

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

AdamWill
Copy link

ntpath.isabs no longer considers paths that start with "/" to be absolute. This is correct behaviour on Windows but causes us problems, because our PathConstants use paths that start with / and expect these to always be considered absolute. To deal with this, let's add an extra slash to the PathConstants; paths starting // are considered absolute by both ntpath and posixpath.

This is an alternative to #111 , it probably doesn't make sense to do both.

ntpath.isabs no longer considers paths that start with "/" to
be absolute. This is correct behaviour on Windows but causes us
problems, because our `PathConstants` use paths that start with
/ and expect these to always be considered absolute. To deal
with this, let's add an extra slash to the `PathConstants`;
paths starting `//` are considered absolute by both ntpath and
posixpath.

Signed-off-by: Adam Williamson <[email protected]>
@AdamWill
Copy link
Author

The CI failure seems to be just because github no longer offers Python 2.x.

roehling added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 20, 2024
In the early days, catkin_lint was unable to do sophisticated path name
analysis, which is why some checks ignored absolute paths as a
workaround.

As the workaround is no longer required, fix the check for valid
INCLUDE_DIRS.

This commit also supersedes the proposed solutions in #111 and #112.

Fixes #110
@roehling
Copy link
Member

Thank you for your PR, after some review I decided to fix the underlying issue, i.e., the somewhat hacky usage of path.isabs().

@roehling roehling closed this Sep 20, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants