Re: Change in binary name w/ meson build

[Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>]

On Wed, 2018-09-12 at 10:30 +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 06:21:06AM +0000, Shahaf Shuler wrote:
> > Friday, September 7, 2018 6:24 PM, Bruce Richardson:
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Change in binary name w/ meson build
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 03:13:43PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 11:52:10AM +0000, Shahaf Shuler wrote:
> > > > >    Hi Bruce,
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >    Playing w/ meson build I got to know that the binary name
> > > > > for testpmd
> > > > >    got changed to dpdk-testpmd.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >    Not sure if it was discussed or not before, but such
> > > > > change will affect
> > > > >    all the automation used to run testpmd w/ the old build
> > > > > system.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >    What is the reason for the change in the name?
> > > > 
> > > > The primary driver was that the autotest binary could not be
> > > > called "test"
> > > > any more, since that is a reserved name. When appending a dpdk
> > > > prefix
> > > > to the test binary, I felt for consistency that other binaries
> > > > should
> > > > have a dpdk prefix too, to indicate that they come from DPDK.
> > > > If this
> > > > is a problem, we can remove the prefix from the binaries easily
> > > > enough.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Also to point out that when building with meson the scripting is
> > > going to have
> > > to change anyway, right. The actual build commands are different,
> > > the
> > > configuration commands are different, and the directories the
> > > resulting
> > > binaries are placed in are different too. Therefore, I'd like to
> > > keep the name
> > > prefixes if possible, since for automated tooling on DPDK there
> > > are going to
> > > have to be lots of other changes anyway.
> > > 
> > > For packagers, the rename I understand could be problematic, but
> > > that could
> > > probably be solved by symlinks in the install phase.
> > 
> > I am fine w/ the testpmd -> dpdk-testpmd change as it is more
> > correct to put it explicitly under the dpdk namespace.
> > I was raising this point because I am not sure it was explicitly
> > mentioned on the release notes and was hoping to get feedback also
> > from the people who build dpdk for distro
> > 
> 
> Agreed, I should have got wider feedback for this change at the time,
> but
> it's not to late to fix if it is problematic, I think. I too like
> having
> the namespacing, though.
> 
> /Bruce

I can ship backward-compatibility symlinks easily for binary programs
in Debian/Ubuntu (unlike for libraries where it's a bit more
difficult), so personally I'm OK with namespacing things.

Christian?

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi