From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix build issues with CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS=y Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 22:30:07 -0400 Message-ID: <20141004023007.GA20204@localhost.localdomain> References: <1412265386-26291-1-git-send-email-sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com> <20141002172634.GE4900@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20141002200420.GB29590@mhcomputing.net> <20141002202451.GF4900@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20141003103110.GB28988@sivswdev02.ir.intel.com> <20141003112833.GA24059@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20141003165240.65e174ea@urahara> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141003165240.65e174ea@urahara> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:52:40PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 07:28:33 -0400 > Neil Horman wrote: > > > I.e. you can ship your pmd's > > pacakged separately from your core > > I was hoping only the application API would be "stable" > As we know from Linux kernel, internal API's will never remain stable. > None of the API's are stable. My only hope with the ABI series I've posted is to keep the interfaces stable for a release beyond the next time they change, so that application developers aren't consistently caught off guard if they don't synchronize with the DPDK release schedule. I know the kernel API's are constantly changing, but this isn't the kernel, its a user space library. Theres nothing that prevents a third party from writing a pmd to interface to the ethdev library, which is no different from any other user space library. If the DPDK wants to get packaged like other libraries in distributions, it needs to provide stability assurances like other libraries. Neil