[Bf-committers] CMake minimum version increased to 3.0
Brecht Van Lommel
brechtvanlommel at pandora.be
Tue Nov 10 10:24:11 CET 2015
Following the VFX reference platform is nice for interop with other
software, but it won't make building Blender any easier, quite the
opposite. It specifically requires using library versions that are
different from the ones in Linux distributions and backporting compilers.
It's not directly relevant to CMake versions anyway since that's not
On Nov 10, 2015 09:06, "Thomas Volkmann" <lists at thomasvolkmann.com> wrote:
> Blender could have saved itself some trouble by sticking to that. On the
> hand it's always good to have someone push the boundaries and go for newer
> versions, but it will be pretty hard for upcoming pipeline-integration
> Fedora23 is switching to python3 now, so it will only take a couple of more
> years until it becomes the standard....
> > Sergey Sharybin <sergey.vfx at gmail.com> hat am 10. November 2015 um 07:47
> > geschrieben:
> > General consideration:
> > While from the developers point of view it's not difficult to get newer
> > CMake to compile Blender it's not something we should force everyone to
> > That being said, all the required libraries versions are in fact as low
> > it could be to deliver artists (that's a keyword) new awesome features.
> > the case of CMake it's purely developer's maintenance only, nobody else
> > will see benefit of the version bump.
> > And one more thing here -- majority of the libraries are optional for
> > Blender, you can start hacking round with lite version of Blender after
> > disabling some features. With CMake you can't do it, you'll just be
> > to update the package.
> > Answer to the install_deps.sh:
> > You surely can manually compile CMake and put it to /opt, but then you
> > wouldn't be able to use simplified builds like just typing `make` from
> > root folder of the sources. Same actually applies to installing CMake's
> > official binary packages.
> > Personal opinion:
> > Initially i've only checked current Debian stable and it ships
> > and i thought it's all reasonable since Debian is known to be rather
> > conservative in all the package versions. But appears Ubuntu which was
> > known to be more a bleeding edge doesn't have required package. In this
> > situation i don't think we're in a hurry to do any modifications in the
> > build systems.
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Jeffrey <italic.rendezvous at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > The issue is making the dev (or user, like me) jump through hoop after
> > > hoop just to get it building. It's difficult enough to build and
> > > troubleshoot your system, but adding new, not-readily-available
> > > requirements only compounds the problem. By "readily available" I mean
> > > package update or additional package in your package manager like yum
> > > apt. Then if you have to rebuild a system, or build a new one, you need
> > > to redo or remember how the system was modified in order to recreate
> > > Granted, install_deps.sh does a pretty good job of getting the required
> > > libs for blender, but this is a safeguard for building locally only.
> > > Would it be realistic to provide this automated build method for every
> > > new lib a new cmake will require?
> > >
> > > Then what about cmake-gui? Not everybody can or wants to use the
> > > terminal to the extent a power user can. You can't use an older version
> > > of the gui on a new version of cmake, so then you'd have to build the
> > > gui as well. What else does this mean? Maybe newer library versions
> > > your distribution provides. I've had this problem numerous times when
> > > trying to build less complex software, to the point of not being able
> > > or getting too frustrated with the requirements to do it (some
> > > essentially required a whole rebuild of my system).
> > >
> > > The issue is that distros like CentOS, Debian and Ubuntu LTS are built
> > > to be stable, which inherently means using older, harshly-tested,
> > > software. For example, Fedora 23 is the current version, which is
> > > approximately three years ahead of CentOS 7, the most recent release.
> > > How can you support both of these systems when their software versions
> > > are lightyears apart?
> > >
> > > On 11/09/2015 05:45 PM, Howard Trickey wrote:
> > > >> the issue isn't about Ubuntu 14.10 specifically, its mainly that
> > > >> someone can have a year-old installation which wouldn't be able to
> > > >> build Blender (without manually getting CMake at least).
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > I was in the situation (Ubuntu with 2.8 CMake); it only took a few
> > > minutes
> > > > to download the latest CMake release and put it in a private place
> > > fix
> > > > my PATH to use it. So maybe this isn't such an onerous requirement.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Bf-committers mailing list
> > > > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > > > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jeffrey "Italic_" Hoover
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
More information about the Bf-committers