Because I notice that the buildbot for VC11 has been dead for nearly a month now and thus we’re literally stuck with builds using the old VC2008 compiler and the resulting speed hit that results from it.
So is Blender really going to again be stuck with VC2008 now as it used to be for many years past or will work be done to get VC11 working again, because I personally found it was a lot more stable than MingW while allowing OpenMP and faster speeds using Cycles. It would be a shame if Shadowrom’s efforts to speed up Blender end up going to waste.
So will the VC11 buildbot be fixed at all or is support for that going to be pulled as well?
So I get that everyone doesn’t mind the idea that Windows users will always be stuck with builds where Cycles renders 20-30% slower than Linux and Mac then, and that in the end, the idea of faster compiled code for Windows was never meant to be?
Has there been any recent discussion in dev. circles about resuming VC11 builds from the buildbot or even moving to VC11 in the near future, because I didn’t see any problems when using VC11 builds (just as stable as VC2008 builds and works with OpenMP)? Is it possible that Shadowrom is not just going to be around till further notice (since he is the one that initiated the project)?
Oh well, I guess another dev. might pick it up sooner or later, it’s just that VC2008 builds in Cycles is only able to render about 80 percent of the samples that VC11 can do in the same time frame, something that could mean a big time difference (which the difference between VC2008 and VC11 is even larger than the difference between VC11 and MingW).
I see, letting VC2008 use perish outright would be especially useful then if it means that Blender can take advantage of the newest additions to the C/C++ languages (and especially since it might be starting to cause issues with libraries).
Smells like politics to me, I’ve never used the build bot builds before but have to say i agree with Ace. Just because Blenders open doesn’t mean we have to hate the windows users, I like Linux for example but doesn’t mean i can run a business from that operating system right now. Maybe Valve should stop pissing about and get a alpha released to allow people like me to consider having a linux based build on my machine (which isn’t a simple thing, new partitions, backup of drives already near to full to find the space to run it without paying out for extra storage.). The machine i used to use linux on dies about 2 months back, Need a reason to update kit if just to use an open operating system.
I really don’t think it’s even close to the point of conspiracy, just that a lot of developers already have the full version of VC2008 and prefer that they don’t purchase the new version every year, if the devs. truly hated Windows users they wouldn’t even bother to make official builds (much like seen with the GIMP), or use a compiler from 2002 (when Blender became open source).
DingTo; can you by any chance get the VC11 buildbot up and running again, if not, would it be possible to provide VC11 builds on Graphicall now and then?
On top of that, 2.70 is supposed to be the start of a new development chapter for Blender, it would be a perfect fit to upgrade the compiling software as well (much like how the developer environment and website was upgraded). It might be that Windows XP users will still need VC2008 builds and there can be checks for that, but they will soon be forced to upgrade for security reasons once Microsoft pulls the plug on its support.
EDIT: Brecht just commented on developer.blender.org that he does not mind if the Blender project moves to using VC11, a promising sign to say the least.
EDIT2: Alexandr makes a suggestion saying that the devs. just skip VC11 altogether and use VC2013 instead (saying he’ll have all of the libraries built in a week or so), part of the argument is that Blender will be able to use all of the latest C/C++ functions in the core which could mean optimization and cleanup opportunities that can’t readily be done right now.
One of the current proposals is to pull support for WinXP when Microsoft does (which is next April).
If you’re still using XP after that date, you will need to be aware that your machine will become much more prone to hacking and malware due to how they are set to become a popular target as a result of the discontinuation of security updates, so upgrading Windows or moving to Mac or Linux will be a must if you care about keeping your work safe.
Personally, I found Windows 7 to be the best version beyond XP, I’ve been using it for a year and there’s been no major issues (no blue screens or anything of that sort).
Overall, there’s also the proposal to start using VC11 or above starting with 2.70 as even the express edition can make use of OpenMP and 64 bit compiles, my guess is there might be a possibility of a legacy VC2008 build for WinXP users depending on if it’s possible to use a technique for VC11 with XP.
i think focusing on getting mingw fully working as OSS is better than vc11, it’s builds have the same speed (if not better) than the linux ones, after all we are an OSS community and OSS should get the superiority
Only from my experience and what I read, OpenMP causes lockups on builds created with MingW and I have seen crashing issues when editing materials in the Cycles rendered view.
The first priority for the Blender devs. is to develop Blender, not the compiling environment used to build it, fixing the issues that prevent the full use of GCC with Windows is something that the MingW team needs to do. Perhaps you can approach them and give them a helping hand so it can actually be done (that or give a good nudge in terms of priorities).
GCC will never be as fast or as stable on Windows as VC for the simple reason that Microsoft doesn’t support it and in fact has a (admittedly weak) financial interest in GCC working poorly.
On the other hand, getting the latest version of VC into developers hands every so often is an expensive proposition for a FOSS project.
I’d love to see minGW working again, since it’s still by far much quicker for rendering than anything else. VC11 is good when one needs openMP for sculpting for example, but for rendering only minGW is the best.
What Microsoft has to do with GCC anyway? It’s up to GCC developers to make it work in Windows. Besides, what is the problem with GCC Windows? I’ve developed my own programs with VC08 and GCC at the same time, using GCC as final compiler. No problems at all. I guess there are some library problems, but I can’t understand how it’s a problem of a compiler?
It’s not Microsoft’s job to help the GCC developers get it supported fully in Windows (in one sense because they have their own compiling product), much like how it’s not their job to help the Blender team maintain their Windows builds. The GCC developers just haven’t made it a high priority to get it working just as well in Windows as with Linux or Mac.
Also, Visual Studio upgrades can become expensive mainly if the Blender devs. decided to only support the latest version year after year, the Blender team stuck with VC2008 for at least 5 years now so it’s definitely not a real expensive thing if it was decided that it’s only, say, every 3-5 years that they must upgrade their environment rather than every year. I for one can easily tolerate VC11 builds because they’re actually not that much slower than MingW (about 10 percent), not like the 30-40 percent compared to VC2008.
OpenMP causes lockups on builds created with MingW and I have seen crashing issues when editing materials in the Cycles rendered view.
that has been solved but no one is listening, i’ve been using openmp in mingw for some and it woks great.
Last I heard, it was a patch for the MingW system that wasn’t yet an official part of the code, has it been committed since?
I guess in that case, all that would need to be done is ensure that it’s just as stable as the VC builds and the devs. can actually move all of the platforms to GCC, but if it’s not ready yet, then VC11 and later is still a good choice for Windows users.
it was a patch for the MingW system that wasn’t yet an official part of the code.
there are no official mingw64 anyway, so it is all dependent on user support as well as the openmp fix which is not a patch but rather a fixed lib, and using it to compile for a while and test physics -which instantly crash before- and it worked fine.
This isn’t so political (you conspiracy theorists can relax) - mostly the problem is simply that supporting a new version of a compiler on Windows means building a lot of dependencies and its a fairly tedious and thankless task, currently Windows support is mostly maintained by volunteers.
Its not that Linux is preferred, it just happens to work smoothly for switching compilers - I have builds with Clang/IntelC++/GCC - without having to put much effort in other then switching the compiler command.
With Blender - platforms are not dead - just maintained … or not.
Platforms that are less popular among developers tend to be not quite as well maintained (even if this shouldn’t be the case - its just what ends up happening).
If someone wants to get some platform like FreeBSD/Solaris/MinGW/Windows&IntelC++ … etc better supported - we don’t stop them either.
When I think about, I don’t know if building the libs to allow a faster Blender on Windows is all that thankless, there were quite a lot of happy people when the VC11 builds became available simply because of the faster rendering in Cycles.
I just think that the devs. should follow Shadowrom’s example and work to provide a better and faster build for Windows users by upgrading the compiling environment, if not only for the fact to avoid the idea that Blender is just another FOSS project where Windows users (a huge group of users on this forum) should be grateful to even have a bone thrown to them.
Today marks the one month anniversary of the death of all of the faster options in terms of Cycles rendering for Windows users, I would be quite happy if this doesn’t stretch onward to two months or indefinitely.
