Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
Excerpts from Allan McRae's message of Sun Jul 19 00:00:53 -0400 2009: So the package is out-of-date and the new version does not build? Could be a reason why it is not updated... I recall Blender not having support for python 2.6 at some point (while we had 2.6). It seems some folks have now successfully built Blender with 2.6 support, but it seeems woefully unofficial. I wonder what can be done about that. -- Andrei Thorp, Developer: Xandros Corp. (http://www.xandros.com)
Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
On 20.07.2009 15:46, Andrei Thorp wrote: Excerpts from Allan McRae's message of Sun Jul 19 00:00:53 -0400 2009: So the package is out-of-date and the new version does not build? Could be a reason why it is not updated... I recall Blender not having support for python 2.6 at some point (while we had 2.6). It seems some folks have now successfully built Blender with 2.6 support, but it seeems woefully unofficial. I wonder what can be done about that. Doesn't Blender 2..49a have Python 2.6 support by default? At least the Windows downloads on blender.org come with Python 2.5 OR Python 2.6.
Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
Excerpts from Sven-Hendrik Haase's message of Mon Jul 20 09:58:43 -0400 2009: On 20.07.2009 15:46, Andrei Thorp wrote: Excerpts from Allan McRae's message of Sun Jul 19 00:00:53 -0400 2009: So the package is out-of-date and the new version does not build? Could be a reason why it is not updated... I recall Blender not having support for python 2.6 at some point (while we had 2.6). It seems some folks have now successfully built Blender with 2.6 support, but it seeems woefully unofficial. I wonder what can be done about that. Doesn't Blender 2..49a have Python 2.6 support by default? At least the Windows downloads on blender.org come with Python 2.5 OR Python 2.6. I briefly read that they were hoping to push it in for Blender 2.5, but perhaps what I read was incorrect/outdated. I'd actually been running Python 2.5 in parallel with 2.6 for a while for the blender support, and it's a pita :) I'm hoping it'll be fixed up. -- Andrei Thorp, Developer: Xandros Corp. (http://www.xandros.com)
Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
2009/7/19 Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org: Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: Dear Arch Devs, I'm reposting this mail to arch-general because I was ignored on arch-dev-public. You can not post to arch-dev-public so your message was not ignored, we just never saw it. I wonder what should be done about the blender package in [extra]. The package hasn't been updated for quite some time (it is correctly marked out-of-date), a few bug reports have been filed for it, it doesn't build anymore and the package maintainer doesn't answer my mails. What can be done in such a case? So the package is out-of-date and the new version does not build? Could be a reason why it is not updated... Anyway, the way this tends to be dealt with, is someone posts a working PKGBUILD here and another dev updates it. If this happens regularly for a package, either another dev with take over maintenance or it will be dropped to [community]. Allan IMO the problem is that you (devs) use make to build blender which is several years deprecated and probably no-one builds blender this way. Maybe they've dropped support for it completely. I suggest using SCons. Maybe you can reuse my blender-svn PKGBUILD from AUR, only thing that has to be changed for this purpose is the part where data is downloaded from SVN server. There is one problem which I'm aware of with this package – it installs blender executable in /usr/share/blender and adds wrapper to /usr/bin. I'll probably move blender to /opt in near future. Lukáš stativ Jirkovský
Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
2009/7/19 Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkov...@gmail.com: IMO the problem is that you (devs) use make to build blender which is several years deprecated and probably no-one builds blender this way. Maybe they've dropped support for it completely. I suggest using SCons. Maybe you can reuse my blender-svn PKGBUILD from AUR, only thing that has to be changed for this purpose is the part where data is downloaded from SVN server. There is one problem which I'm aware of with this package – it installs blender executable in /usr/share/blender and adds wrapper to /usr/bin. I'll probably move blender to /opt in near future. There is also a request about building to SCons: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/14893 and there is a PKGBUILD too (for stable, not svn version). -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:28:51PM +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: On 19.07.2009 12:42, Alessandro Doro wrote: On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 12:29:20PM +0300, Roman Kyrylych wrote: 2009/7/19 Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkov...@gmail.com: IMO the problem is that you (devs) use make to build blender which is several years deprecated and probably no-one builds blender this way. Maybe they've dropped support for it completely. I suggest using SCons. Maybe you can reuse my blender-svn PKGBUILD from AUR, only thing that has to be changed for this purpose is the part where data is downloaded from SVN server. There is one problem which I'm aware of with this package – it installs blender executable in /usr/share/blender and adds wrapper to /usr/bin. I'll probably move blender to /opt in near future. There is also a request about building to SCons: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/14893 and there is a PKGBUILD too (for stable, not svn version). That PKGBUILD needs a cleanup; depends and makedepends are wrong. I'll soon post an updated version. FYI I had success with the NaN method. The key is (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/14766#comment46628): export NAN_DEBUG=-O Today I'll work for a PKGBUILD. I fixed both packages and uploaded them. Take whichever you want. http://doubleskill.de/svens_stuff/blender-pkgs.tar.gz So you're providing a (scons) PKGBUILD for x86_64 with '-march=i686' and '-mtune=generic' compile flags? Note that all you need (no sedding) for the NaN method is, not reviewed: export NAN_NO_PLUGIN=true export NAN_PYTHON_VERSION=2.6 export INTERNATIONAL=true export WITH_BF_OPENMP=true export NAN_USE_FFMPEG_CONFIG=true export NAN_ODE=/usr export WITH_VERSE=true export NAN_DEBUG=-O and a patch (assuming we DO want sound): - NAN_SND_LIBS += $(NAN_OPENAL)/lib/libopenal.a + NAN_SND_LIBS += -lopenal in source/Makefile
Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
On 20.07.2009 03:46, Alessandro Doro wrote: On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:28:51PM +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: On 19.07.2009 12:42, Alessandro Doro wrote: On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 12:29:20PM +0300, Roman Kyrylych wrote: 2009/7/19 Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkov...@gmail.com: IMO the problem is that you (devs) use make to build blender which is several years deprecated and probably no-one builds blender this way. Maybe they've dropped support for it completely. I suggest using SCons. Maybe you can reuse my blender-svn PKGBUILD from AUR, only thing that has to be changed for this purpose is the part where data is downloaded from SVN server. There is one problem which I'm aware of with this package – it installs blender executable in /usr/share/blender and adds wrapper to /usr/bin. I'll probably move blender to /opt in near future. There is also a request about building to SCons: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/14893 and there is a PKGBUILD too (for stable, not svn version). That PKGBUILD needs a cleanup; depends and makedepends are wrong. I'll soon post an updated version. FYI I had success with the NaN method. The key is (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/14766#comment46628): export NAN_DEBUG=-O Today I'll work for a PKGBUILD. I fixed both packages and uploaded them. Take whichever you want. http://doubleskill.de/svens_stuff/blender-pkgs.tar.gz So you're providing a (scons) PKGBUILD for x86_64 with '-march=i686' and '-mtune=generic' compile flags? Note that all you need (no sedding) for the NaN method is, not reviewed: export NAN_NO_PLUGIN=true export NAN_PYTHON_VERSION=2.6 export INTERNATIONAL=true export WITH_BF_OPENMP=true export NAN_USE_FFMPEG_CONFIG=true export NAN_ODE=/usr export WITH_VERSE=true export NAN_DEBUG=-O and a patch (assuming we DO want sound): - NAN_SND_LIBS += $(NAN_OPENAL)/lib/libopenal.a + NAN_SND_LIBS += -lopenal in source/Makefile Whoops, sorry. Didn't see that as I hoped that scons would do some magic for me. Oh well, mind adding a little sed magic into the PKGBUILD to make up for it? Apart from that, building using scons seems to work quite well AND IT HAS COLORS. Honestly though, I don't mind whatever PKGBUILD and build system you are going to choose as long as I won't miss out on any features in Blender :). Since the current Blender version in [extra] is a couple of months old, it should be a priority to update that package as soon as possible.
[arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
Dear Arch Devs, I'm reposting this mail to arch-general because I was ignored on arch-dev-public. I wonder what should be done about the blender package in [extra]. The package hasn't been updated for quite some time (it is correctly marked out-of-date), a few bug reports have been filed for it, it doesn't build anymore and the package maintainer doesn't answer my mails. What can be done in such a case? I wouldn't want to suggest anything that would break the peace and render the happy rainbows gray in Arch Dev land, yet I wonder if it would be suitable in such a case to degrade the package in question to [community] so that a TU may take care of it? This is of course assuming that no other dev wants to take over blender. -- Sven-Hendrik
Re: [arch-general] What to do about the blender package?
Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: Dear Arch Devs, I'm reposting this mail to arch-general because I was ignored on arch-dev-public. You can not post to arch-dev-public so your message was not ignored, we just never saw it. I wonder what should be done about the blender package in [extra]. The package hasn't been updated for quite some time (it is correctly marked out-of-date), a few bug reports have been filed for it, it doesn't build anymore and the package maintainer doesn't answer my mails. What can be done in such a case? So the package is out-of-date and the new version does not build? Could be a reason why it is not updated... Anyway, the way this tends to be dealt with, is someone posts a working PKGBUILD here and another dev updates it. If this happens regularly for a package, either another dev with take over maintenance or it will be dropped to [community]. Allan
