[packman] Blender that supports x264, etc

[Jimmy Berry]

Assuming the new machine(s) were brought online as I see mine schedule
and built just fine. ;)

--
Jimmy


On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Jimmy Berry <jimmy at boombatower.com> wrote:
> I see the updated Blender package has been published. Thanks for
> knocking this out. Just tested and I can drag mp4 into video editor
> which I cannot do with base one. I'll go ahead and delete mine.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> --
> Jimmy
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 6:38 AM, Dave Plater <davejplater at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/4/15, Stefan Botter <jsj at jsj.dyndns.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Jimmy,
>>>
>>> sorry, I hit "send" prematurely...
>>>
>>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 00:42:47 -0600
>>> Jimmy Berry <jimmy at boombatower.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I branched obs package, merged in previous packman build changes to
>>>> enable ffmpeg, and cleaned up a bit. I was able to successfully build
>>>> for Tumbleweed x86_64. When I installed locally the package worked
>>>> great and I was able to use features that depend on ffmpeg which I am
>>>> unable to do in the obs version.
>>>>
>>>> See for successful build:
>>>> https://pmbs.links2linux.de/package/binaries/home:boombatower:branches:Extra/blender-update?repository=openSUSE_Tumbleweed
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, the majority of the time the packman obs instance seems
>>>> to just loop trying to build the package since it ends up terminating
>>>> the build process at some random percentage through the build. It
>>>> seems like it is running out of ram.
>>>
>>> Seems possible, as most workers are running chroot builds, where there
>>> are no guaranteed resources, and hence builds with contraints are not
>>> scheduled to build. ATM only swkj11-swkj14 are workers building in KVM,
>>> and all but 11 had a configuration problem throughout October - so
>>> nothing was built there. They are fixed now.
>>>
>>>> The previous build on packman had
>>>> the following memory _constraint:
>>>>
>>>>     <physicalmemory>
>>>>       <size unit="M">1700</size>
>>>>     </physicalmemory>
>>>>
>>>> I upped to 2000, but then it seems to never be scheduled. I am
>>>> assuming none of the packman workers have that much ram?
>>>
>>> swkj11 has 1897MB RAM available for build, swkj12-14 have 1950MB. A
>>> _constraint file requesting more than these values will block the
>>> package from being scheduled to build.
>>>
>>>> If so does anyone have suggestions for different build flags to
>>>> possibly reduce ram usage during compile or acquire a more powerful
>>>> worker or two?
>>>
>>> As mentioned some days ago, I was able to secure some more hardware,
>>> and am currently - as time permits - in the phase to repair and enable
>>> it for use - just Yesterday evening I was able to restart the workers
>>> 15-19 (virtual machines doing chroot builds), which before were running
>>> on old desktops, which I have to return to their proposed use soon.
>>> There is a test machine swkjt01 currently providing 4 processes in KVM,
>>> but providing 1GB RAM, only.
>>>
>>> I have some more machines, and provided I can fix them, I will at least
>>> one of them configure to run with more than 2 GB instance memory.
>>>
>>> As said, as time permits, perhaps over the weekend.
>>>
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Stefan
>>> --
>>> Stefan Botter zu Hause
>>> Bremen
>>>
>>
>> I've got maintainer rights for Extra/blender and have synced it with
>> openSUSE but it Factory and Tumbleweed have multiple ffmpeg related
>> unresolvables, Leap42 builds though. I'm going to wait for it to
>> settle for a while, it built for Factory and Tumbleweed in home:davepl
>> before I submitted to Extra.
>> Regards
>> Dave
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Packman mailing list
>> Packman at links2linux.de
>> http://lists.links2linux.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/packman