From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Ehrhardt Subject: Re: doc: announce renaming of ethdev library Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 11:29:53 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1469550141-24038-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <20160727183308.2c2efcf7@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: dev , Thomas Monjalon To: Jan Viktorin Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com (mail-qk0-f178.google.com [209.85.220.178]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FE0A2BD3 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 11:30:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qk0-f178.google.com with SMTP id o67so57374144qke.1 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 02:30:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160727183308.2c2efcf7@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Thomas, just my two cents as Ubuntu DPDK maintainer (and part of the Debian Team that does the same). (Yeah I really could reuse it three times :-) ) It will be a bit of effort to adapt, but should be no rocket-science. I like that eventually the namespace will be cleaner. Just curious, do we already know by looking ahead if ethdev will get an ABI bump anyway? So will the transition be: a) libethdev4 -> librte_ethdev5 b)libethdev4 -> librte_ethdev4 If it is b) would/should one provide a compat symlink then in your Opinion? Anyway, for now I think it is fair to say: Acked-by: Christian Ehrhardt Christian Ehrhardt Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server Canonical Ltd On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Jan Viktorin wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 18:22:21 +0200 > Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > The right name of ethdev should be dpdk_netdev. However: > > 1/ We are using rte_ prefix in the code and library names. > > 2/ The API uses rte_ethdev > > That's why 16.11 will just have the rte_ prefix prepended to > > the library filename as every other libraries. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > > Acked-by: Jan Viktorin >