From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luca Boccassi Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] build: rename pkgconfig to libdpdk.pc Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:52:02 +0100 Message-ID: <1505735522.19272.9.camel@gmail.com> References: <20170915173612.13636-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com> <20170915173612.13636-2-luca.boccassi@gmail.com> <20170918110938.GA10264@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Bruce Richardson Return-path: Received: from mail-wr0-f173.google.com (mail-wr0-f173.google.com [209.85.128.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69CA21AEEB for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:52:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr0-f173.google.com with SMTP id l39so228859wrl.12 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2017 04:52:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170918110938.GA10264@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Mon, 2017-09-18 at 12:09 +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 06:36:10PM +0100, luca.boccassi@gmail.com > wrote: > > From: Luca Boccassi > >=20 > > In Debian and Ubuntu we have been shipping a pkgconfig file for > > DPDK > > for more than a year now, and the filename is libdpdk.pc. > > A few downstream projects, like OVS and Collectd, have adopted the > > use of libdpdk.pc in their build systems as well. > > In order to maintain backward compatibility, rename the file from > > DPDK.pc to libdpdk.pc. > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi > > --- >=20 > I find the 'lib' bit strange, but if that is what is already out > there, > then we should keep it for compatibility. Not sure where the original name came from, it's been like that for a few years - it might have been my fault :-) In Debian/Ubuntu libraries development headers, unversioned shared object symlinks and static archives always ship in packages named libfoo[api-ver]-dev. This is strictly enforced by policy. We have libdpdk-dev for example. Then, usually, pkg-config files follow the same naming convention, so that if you want to build against libfoo-dev you use pkg-config libfoo. This makes it nice and predictable. But IIRC it's not enforced, and not universally followed. > In future, we might create two pkgconfig files to transition over to > a > new name, but to start with lets use what is being looked for by our > dependencies. >=20 > Acked-by: Bruce Richardson Even just a symlink should work fine, at least it does with the pkg- config I have on Debian. Should not cause issues on any implementation. --=20 Kind regards, Luca Boccassi