Re: [Openexr-devel] Future versions: (WAS: RE: OpenEXR 1.7.1 release)

[Christopher Horvath]

Hey everybody,

Wouldn't it be easier and more foolproof to have each of the libraries as part of the same package, but simply don't link against libraries that are not needed? Alembic requires only IlmBase as well, but there'd be no difficulty simply not using  libIlmImf, even if it was there.  I don't understand what the user cost of having them bundled is, but the additional overhead for keeping them in sync (even with the same version numbers) is greater than zero. For example, I frequently forget:

--with-ilmbase-prefix=/the/damn/place/i/just/built/it/to

when I'm building a new ilmbase and a new openexr version into a local dir rather than /usr/local

Even within libraries, object files that are not used don't get bound. I'm not suggesting that the separate libraries be combined into a single compiled library, just that they are part of a single tar-ball, repository, versioning & installation scheme.  This isn't much different from how IlmBase already has multiple components that must be built together:

libIex

libImath

libIlmThread

etc.

As per my previous mail, for developers who are building the libraries themselves, rather than using a package system or using precompiled libs, and don't want openexr - they could simply specify "--disable-openexr" as an autoconf option.  I'm not sure what the Xcode & Visual Studio equivalent is, but it must be doable.

Chris

On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Alex Forsythe <address@hidden> wrote:

CTL requires IlmBase but doesn¹t require OpenEXR so having IlmBase as a
standalone package seems pretty important.

You might want to consider moving IlmBase and PyIlmBase into a separate
repository or repositories as they kind of feel like their own projects.

Alex


Alexander Forsythe - Imaging Engineering Manager - Science and Technology
Council
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences - Tel 310-247-3000 x3310
Fax 310-247-3611 - www.oscars.org - address@hidden

On 7/31/12 3:49 PM, "Christopher Horvath" <address@hidden> wrote:

>Hey Piotr,
>
>
>I think this is a really good idea, and in fact, I really think they
>should be combined into a single package. It's perfectly reasonable to
>just not link against libraries you don't need - but by having them
>separate, it implies that you can mix & match OpenEXR
> versions and IlmBase versions, which obviously you can't.  You could
>even have:
>
>
>--disable-openexr
>--disable-pyilmbase
>
>
>in the autoconf stuff for people who didn't have tiff or jpeg installed
>and didn't want build errors.
>
>On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Piotr Stanczyk
><address@hidden> wrote:
>
>Hi All,
>
>I am thinking about standardising on a single version for the different
>components that make up OpenEXR.
>Thus, for the next v2 release we would have
>
>OpenEXR v2.0.0
>IlmBase v2.0.0
>PyIlmBase v2.0.0
>etc
>
>Any strong feeling about this approach?
>
>
>Piotr
>
>

>________________________________________

>From: openexr-devel-bounces+pstanczyk=address@hidden
>[openexr-devel-bounces+pstanczyk=address@hidden]
> on behalf of Piotr Stanczyk [address@hidden]
>Sent: 31 July 2012 15:36
>To: address@hidden;
>address@hidden
>Subject: [Openexr-devel] OpenEXR 1.7.1 release
>
>
>Tuesday, July 31st, 2012
>
>OpenEXR v1.7.1 has been released and is available for download.
>Tarballs can be obtained from the downloads section on github:
>https://github.com/openexr/openexr/downloads
><https://github.com/openexr/openexr/downloads>
>
>This release includes the following components:
>
>  OpenEXR: v1.7.1
>  IlmBase: v1.0.3
>  PyIlmBase: v1.0.0 (introduces a Boost dependency)
>  OpenEXR_Viewers: v1.0.2
>
>Please see the Changelog for additional information in each of the
>modules.
>
>
>For the developer community:  The master branch in git hub has been
>tagged as v1.7.1.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Openexr-devel mailing list
>address@hidden
>https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>I think this situation absolutely requires that a really futile and
>stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. And we're just the guys to do
>it.
>

--
I think this situation absolutely requires that a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. And we're just the guys to do it.

-- 
I think this situation absolutely requires that a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. And we're just the guys to do it.