> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Thomas Krijnen <[email protected]> wrote: >> Currently python add-ons are installed in subfolder, say ./2.65/, of the >> user's home directory. No differentiation is made for 32- and 64 bits >> versions of Blender, which I guess is absolutely fine for the vast majority >> of add-ons. But some add-ons might depend on native modules that are >> compiled for a specific architecture, these add-ons will break if a user >> installed both the 32 bits and 64 bits version of Blender. I know native >> add-ons are not of importance for most users, but are there any plans to >> work around this limitation? I am working on a native importer add-on myself >> for the IFC file format, for reference see: >> http://ifcopenshell.org/ifcblender.html Thanks
It should be possible to distribute both 32 and 64 bit modules in a single addon, and detect automatically which one needs to be loaded. Though I'm not sure it's very important to support users installing both 32 and 64 bit Blenders, I don't know anyone who intentionally does that. If they are trying to use the addon in the wrong bitness you could give an error message. However having a "universal binary" type system where you bundle both 32 and 64 bit in the same addon should work well in this case. On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 6:14 AM, HartsAntler <[email protected]> wrote: > Thomas makes a good point. I'd like to use Cython for my blender > extensions, but currently there is no easy way to provide binaries for all > platforms, and the issue he points out about 32 vs 64bits. Regarding compiling binaries for many platforms in general, that indeed gets complex. But what can we do about this? Brecht. _______________________________________________ Bf-python mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-python
