[Bf-cycles] Build without OpenImageIO

[Brecht Van Lommel]

Hi Guillaume,

Nice work!

Making Cycles use of OpenImageIO optional is fine with me, we could have
that upstream.

Be aware that we use it for a bit more than just loading images. We also
use some of its utilities for handling paths, unique strings, argument
parsing, etc. Those could be replaced and I think that could be good in the
interest of making core Cycles easier to build, but it's not trivial.

Alternatively you keep use the OpenImageIO_Util library that is part of
OpenImageIO. It is much smaller and includes just these utilities, so you'd
only have to make the image reading/writing part in Cycles optional.

Regards,
Brecht.

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Guillaume Chéreau <
guillaume.chereau at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all, this is my first message to this list.
>
> I am interested in integrating cycles into my open source voxel editor
> project 'goxel':
> https://github.com/guillaumechereau/goxel
>
> Today I had some success compiling cycles along goxel and rendering
> some cubes with it!
>
> One thing that I want to do is reducing the size of cycles as much as
> I can to make it lightweight and more portable (for example I would
> like to be able to compile if for iOS).
>
> One of the dependencies I want to remove is OpenImageIO, since I don't
> really need that in goxel.  I was thinking of simply creating a dummy
> library with the mimimal api required to compile cycles, or maybe
> modifying cycles itself to make the image support optional.
>
> Any hint on the best way to do that?  If I make OpenImageIO optional,
> would there be interest to merge the changes upstream?
>
> Regards,
> Guillaume
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-cycles mailing list
> Bf-cycles at blender.org
> https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-cycles
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-cycles/attachments/20180305/1ebd182b/attachment.html>