From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: add missing long-options for short
	option arguments
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:55:43 +0100
Message-ID: <CALwxeUvTSO125pyD5kZmUMPsSAsgjQRSNeQAon1MsSmt1AgewA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1456427356-67147-1-git-send-email-keith.wiles@intel.com>
 <20160225213203.GB14936@bricha3-MOBL3>
 <AA049994-42DF-45FB-AA70-B013E427A0FF@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-ob0-f176.google.com (mail-ob0-f176.google.com
 [209.85.214.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDADC2B94
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  3 Mar 2016 15:56:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-ob0-f176.google.com with SMTP id xx9so21962115obc.2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 03 Mar 2016 06:56:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <AA049994-42DF-45FB-AA70-B013E427A0FF@intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com> wrot=
e:
>>On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 01:09:16PM -0600, Keith Wiles wrote:
>>> A number of short options for EAL are missing long options
>>> and this patch adds those missing options.
>>>
>>> The missing long options are for:
>>> -c add --coremask
>>> -d add --driver
>>> -l add --corelist
>>> -m add --memsize
>>> -n add --mem-channels
>>> -r add --mem-ranks
>>> -v add --version
>>> Add an alias for --lcores using --lcore-map
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>
>>
>>Why do we need long options for all the short options?
>
> I think we need the long options to match the short options just because =
it makes sense to me to have long options for all short options. Take the c=
ase of -v, just about everyone else has a =E2=80=94version long-option, but=
 we do not.
>
> The real reason is to allow for DPDK configuration via a configuration fi=
le and I wanted to use the same strings for the config file variables as th=
e command line options. I figured I would add the long options now as they =
do not effect the configuration file patch.

No strong opinion on this.

Just, why "memsize" with no -  but "mem-channels" ?
And why cut down to mem rather than memory ?


--=20
David Marchand