[Bf-committers] Static linux version, drop?

[Reuben Martin]

Check it, yo!: Campbell Barton was sayin:
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Alex Fraser <alex at phatcore.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> 
wrote:

> [ ... ]

> On Arch-Linux theres a mesagl package but I cant install it without
> removing my nvidia-drivers,

Gentoo can have both in parallel, and you can use the eselect script to choose 
which is active.

> Even in cases where they do co-exist I'm sure its possible to wangle
> it somehow but setting up the LD_PRELOAD_PATH/LD_LIBRARY_PATH to point
> to an alternate libGL.so and libGLU.so is beyond most users.
>
> Id also be careful of this because systems will use different mesa
> versions which makes comparing tests between systems more troublesome,
> especially with GLSL which seems to be getting better supported each
> mesa release.
>
> Incase it wasn't clear in previous emails +1 for dropping static
> distro for 2.49.

I think I'm speaking for most people on the forums (although some may disagree 
with me) when I request to take down any Linux builds, static or dynamic, and 
replace them with some documentation on the concept of package repositories.

There are many people trying out linux in place of windows for the first time 
who have no concept of repositories. They come stumbling into the forums 
looking like lost sheep, wondering why the linux package they downloaded from 
blender.org doesn't just install itself like it would in windows world. And it 
takes quite a while to get them to understand the linux package management 
paradigm. And it keeps happening over and over.

Maybe you could still have the linux builds, but try to bury them a bit behind 
documentation explaining and encouraging the use of distro repositories.

-Reuben