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 <[email protected]> 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 And yes there are definitely some outdated things on that list but it 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 > [email protected] > https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
