Re: [PATCH] Add Blender

[Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>]

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Eric Bavier <ericbavier@openmailbox.org> writes:

>>> +         (add-after 'set-paths 'add-ilmbase-include-path
>>> +          (lambda* (#:key inputs #:allow-other-keys)
>>> +            ;; OpenEXR propagates ilmbase, but its include files do not appear
>>> +            ;; in the CPATH, so we need to add "$ilmbase/include/OpenEXR/" to
>>> +            ;; the CPATH to satisfy the dependency on "half.h".
>>> +            (setenv "CPATH"
>>> +                    (string-append (assoc-ref inputs "ilmbase")
>>> +                                   "/include/OpenEXR"
>>> +                                   ":" (getenv "CPATH")))
>>
>> Is the "half.h" header in OpenEXR, or in blender?  If the latter, would
>> it make more sense to instead patch the include directive to include
>> the OpenEXR path?
>
> “half.h” is provided by “ilmbase”.  The include is in Blender, in this
> file:
>
>     blender-2.75a/source/blender/imbuf/intern/openexr/openexr_api.cpp
>
> I could patch this instead, replacing
>
>     #include <half.h>
>
> with
>
>     #include <OpenEXR/half.h>
>
> I’ll fix this, recompile and if there are no further objections push
> upon success.

I tried this, but there are more includes that need to be patched and
even that doesn’t help as the includes in “openexr” headers are still
broken, as the actual directory containing the headers is not in the
CPATH.

As this seems to be a problem with the “openexr”/“ilmbase” packages I’d
rather keep the originally proposed fix, i.e. adding the OpenEXR
directory to the CPATH.

If that’s okay, I’d push the “blender” package without further
modifications.

What do you think?

~~ Ricardo