[Bf-committers] Retiring Linux GLibc 2.11 builder

Francesc Juhe fjuhec at gmail.com
Sun Oct 2 16:38:25 CEST 2016

It’s not really inconsistent, it’s just having those 'bleeding edge' libs on top of RHEL 6.7 and derivatives as a base, which is old.
If vfxplatform was based on latest RHEL, the requirements would be glibc 2.17 but even that would be below 2.19

On 02 Oct 2016, at 16:23, Bastien Montagne <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> Am not reproaching them to be conservative, but to be inconsistent. On 
> one side you have bleeding edge things (ptex, openvdb, alembic, and the 
> hilarious 'lastest' FBX), on the others, years old basis like gcc4.8 or 
> glibc2.13. Not to mention to ask for a compiler that only has 
> *experimental* support of required c++ version…
> Note that this would not prevent building blender over glibc2.13 imho, 
> people just might have to disable some features. Here we are talking 
> about official builds from Blender themselves only.
> Le 02/10/2016 à 16:08, Brian Savery a écrit :
>>> I kind of have serious doubts about a 'large' studio who would not be
>>> able to build its own Blender?
>>> I would agree, but if blender won't build for centos 6/ Rhel you can
>> pretty much guarantee they won't use it, which is unfortunate.
>> And yes there are definitely some outdated things on that list but it
>> definitely is taken seriously in the industry.  And as others have said you
>> do see many "conservative" oses. Up until a few releases ago we had to
>> provide a rhel4 build of prman if I remember correctly.
>> Anyway just something to be aware of not trying to throw a monkey wrench in
>> anything.
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list