Skip to content

Backport the ABI compatibility check workflow to kilted - #3391

Open
fujitatomoya wants to merge 1 commit into
kiltedfrom
fujitatomoya/kilted/abi-check
Open

fujitatomoya wants to merge 1 commit into
kiltedfrom
fujitatomoya/kilted/abi-check

Conversation

@fujitatomoya

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Verbatim copy of .github/workflows/abi.yaml from rolling (#3262, #3276, #3340, #3341). Without it, pull requests targeting kilted get neither the ABI check nor the "ABI compatible" / "ABI break" and backport- labels, because pull_request workflows run from the workflow file of the target branch.

Only abi.yaml is needed here: the sticky comment and the labels are published by abi-report.yaml, a workflow_run workflow, which GitHub always runs from the default branch (rolling). The distro and the REP-0009 policy are resolved from the target branch (distro: auto, policy: auto), so the check is strict on kilted: an incompatible ABI change fails the check.

Verified with the same file on test pull request(s) #3387 (compatible).

Description

backport of abi compliance check github action.

Fixes # (issue)

Is this user-facing behavior change?

No

Did you use Generative AI?

Yes, Claude Fable 5.1

Additional Information

Verbatim copy of .github/workflows/abi.yaml from rolling (#3262, #3276,
ABI check nor the "ABI compatible" / "ABI break" and backport-<distro>
labels, because pull_request workflows run from the workflow file of the
target branch.

Only abi.yaml is needed here: the sticky comment and the labels are
published by abi-report.yaml, a workflow_run workflow, which GitHub always
runs from the default branch (rolling). The distro and the REP-0009 policy
are resolved from the target branch (distro: auto, policy: auto), so the
check is strict on kilted: an incompatible ABI change fails the check.

Verified with the same file on test pull request(s) #3387 (compatible).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tomoya.Fujita <[email protected]>
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 28, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

ABI Compliance Check

✅ Verdict: compatible

Library Verdict Summary
libcomponent_manager.so ✅ compatible No ABI changes detected.
librclcpp.so ✅ compatible No ABI changes detected.
librclcpp_action.so ✅ compatible No ABI changes detected.
librclcpp_lifecycle.so ✅ compatible No ABI changes detected.
✅ libcomponent_manager.so — full abidiff report

Compared:

  • Base: lib-base/libcomponent_manager.so
  • Head: lib-pr/libcomponent_manager.so @ 6784f75
(empty report — no differences printed by abidiff)
✅ librclcpp.so — full abidiff report

Compared:

  • Base: lib-base/librclcpp.so
  • Head: lib-pr/librclcpp.so @ 6784f75
(empty report — no differences printed by abidiff)
✅ librclcpp_action.so — full abidiff report

Compared:

  • Base: lib-base/librclcpp_action.so
  • Head: lib-pr/librclcpp_action.so @ 6784f75
(empty report — no differences printed by abidiff)
✅ librclcpp_lifecycle.so — full abidiff report

Compared:

  • Base: lib-base/librclcpp_lifecycle.so
  • Head: lib-pr/librclcpp_lifecycle.so @ 6784f75
(empty report — no differences printed by abidiff)

Updated for commit 6784f75 · check run · suppressions: /home/runner/work/_temp/ros2-abi-suppressions.txt

@fujitatomoya fujitatomoya left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@ahcorde can you review this and merge?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant