[Bf-committers] Static linux version, drop?

[Campbell Barton]

Hi Alberto,

* Agree that having debian packages could be good, but so far we have
tried to make compatible tar's that can run on any recent linux
install since (it seems) there isnt enough time/people/recourses to to
build packages for specific linux distros.
...As an example, we dont even have docs for how to use the current tar archive.

* Are you interested in building/maintaining deb packages?

* A while ago I spent some time to write a spec file for autopackage
which bundled python and other libs to make a very compatible package
you could run anywhere, but it was rejected to be included with
blender and I didnt bother maintaining it further.
If there was some interest to make a 32 and 64bit package for linux Id
be happy to maintain and update it.
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Ideasman42#Autopackage_.26_Blender_in_Linux

* When we talk about dropping the static version, this would be to
include the same software OpenGL library in the main blender/linux
package which could be started as an option, blender-softgl.sh along
with blender (binary). So we don't loose anything from doing it.

IMHO there have been a disappointing number of useful replies on this
thread, but I didn't see any good reason not to include software-GL
with the main blender build so far.

Ken, can you make some decision before people start complaining about
problems with OSX packages? :D

- Campbell

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Alberto Torres <kungfoobar at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The most popular distro out there is Ubuntu. In *Ubuntu you can click
> .deb packages and gdebi appears, which is a wizard for installing them
> along with needed dependencies. Probably other mainstream distros has
> a similar tool. In the other hand, there are distros like Debian
> (which use people like me :). Both types of distros can benefit from
> simple instructions people can follow in order to add a repository and
> install a package (e.g.: http://www.winehq.org/download/ ). In the
> other way it makes the packaging more complex (altough it can be
> automated) or relying on third parties.
>
> Alternatively we have autoexecutable packages (e.g. autopackage).
> Problem is you may need to set the execution flag or use the terminal
> for executing it, so I'm not really sure about this option.
>
> What I would do: I'd add an oficial .deb (mainly to be installed in
> ubuntu with gdebi, but also for debian) and a simple manual for other
> distros to uncompress and use the .tar.gz either with GUI (e.g. right
> click -> "actions" -> "extract here") or from command-line.
>
> About the static version... I've never used it, but I wouldn't just
> drop it. I would try first setting up opengl by software under
> different distros before deciding what to do. Probably we can ignore
> propietary nvidia/ati driver users (as those will have good OGL
> support), and focus on open source ones.
>
> DiThi
>
>
> 2009/5/25 José Ignacio <jose.cyborg at gmail.com>:
>> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Nathan Letwory <jesterking at letwory.net> wrote:
>>> 2009/5/25 Reuben Martin <reuben.m at gmail.com>:
>>>> Asking to remove completely was probably premature. But I don't think
>>>> there is much, if anything in the documentation about repositories. We
>>>> have people being told by peers that Blender works better on Linux,
>>>> then they immediately install Linux, download the packages from
>>>> blender.org, and from there they can't figure out what to do with it
>>>> and are lost.
>>>>
>>>> I think the noob ratio of people downloading the Linux packages from
>>>> blender.org is very high, because experienced users will load it from
>>>> their repository or build it from SVN.
>>>
>>> The simple and effective solution to that is documentation. A short
>>> how-to unpack and start should suffice.
>>>
>>> I don't think we want to rely solely on distribution builds, since
>>> they might use optimization flags we don't endorse in our official
>>> builds, leading to unnecessary bug reports and wasted debugging time.
>>>
>>> /Nathan
>>
>> Not to say distribution-specific patches not sent to upstream :S i hate those...
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>



-- 
- Campbell