[Bf-committers] Blender on Windows - some thoughts about XP and32bit

[PerfectionCat]

@Ton Roosendaal:

I thank for your decision as one of XP users.
I can still enjoy it for a while in Blender.

PerfectionCat


----- Original Message -----
>From: Ton Roosendaal <ton at blender.org>
>To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org> 
>Date: 2013/12/6, Fri 23:56
>Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender on Windows - some thoughts about XP and32bit
> 
>Hi,
>
>I think we can keep supporting Windows XP (and any OS), for as long:
>
>1) At least one developer helps building and supporting it
>2) It's not holding back current and approved projects.
>
>This we can communicate well though. 
>XP users should be happy 2.69 is working well even.
>
>Further, we can simply keep our code to be 32 bits compliant for a while. Also this is relatively easy to support and not really holding us back now.
>
>-Ton-
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>Ton Roosendaal  -  ton at blender.org   -   www.blender.org
>Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
>Entrepotdok 57A  -  1018AD Amsterdam  -  The Netherlands
>
>
>
>On 5 Dec, 2013, at 19:17, Sergey Sharybin wrote:
>
>> We would need to drop XP at some point, but it should not be ASAP. It
>> should be a clear for everyone process with defined release when we're
>> dropping. Ideally it should be connected with switching to a new official
>> compiler for windows. Meaning, when we're considering MSVC 2013 as a
>> default to build blender on windows then we might stop maintaining old
>> libraries and let XP support fade down naturally.
>> 
>> As for dropping support of 32bit -- i don't see good reason for this just
>> yet. It might be 2-3 people who supports libs on windows, but i only know
>> one who supports all the libs libs on linux. It's not much of hassle if we
>> update libs only when we need this (meaning not just to be on a leading
>> edge with brand-new libs).
>> 
>> Dropping 32bit windows builds would mean we're dropping atom support as
>> well? It might be still useful to be able to run blender on a netbooks i'd
>> say. Also, you might want to use PAE on 32bit platform because of some
>> better load balance and so.
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Thomas Dinges <blender at dingto.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Mitchell,
>>> this is strange, maybe its due to some compiler flags?
>>> 
>>> Maybe Visual Studio 2013 doesn't suffer from this, otherwise it would be
>>> bad. Needs investigation.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Thomas
>>> 
>>> Am 05.12.2013 18:10, schrieb Mitchell Stokes:
>>>> The last time I checked, vc11 created slower Blender builds than vc9 for
>>>> the game engine. Not that I would like to stick to vc9, but vc11 isn't
>>>> always faster. For a specific example, I've found OpenMP to be rather
>>> slow.
>>>> It's been a while since I last ran some tests, but I seem to remember the
>>>> difference being at least 20%.
>>>> 
>>>> --Mitchell Stokes
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> With best regards, Sergey Sharybin
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>