Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] kernel-shark: Add logic for the plugins search path

["Yordan Karadzhov (VMware)" <y.karadz@gmail.com>]

On 22.04.19 г. 14:50 ч., Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 14:29:49 +0300
> "Yordan Karadzhov (VMware)" <y.karadz@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>> I was hoping to test:
>>>
>>> 	string = cmdline_path() + "../../kernel-shark/lib/";
>>>
>>> If that exists, then we know that we are in the source directory.
>>
>> I don't thing this is a good idea. If we search for plugins in a path
>> that is defined like this:
>>    cmdline_path() + "/something/hard/coded/lib/"
> 
> Your missing the "../.." part.
> 
>>
>> Then the GUI will do one thing when started like this:
>> ./kernelshark
>>
>> and anther thing when started like this:
>> bin/kernelshark
> 
> No it shouldn't, unless you moved the binary.
> 
> I said to add "../../plugins" to the path that the kernelshark binary
> is executed from. If you were to move kernelshark, then yes. it would
> not longer give you the same result.
> 
> If the binary is in:
> 
>   kernelshark/bin/kernelshark
> 
> and you ran it as: kernelshark/bin/kernelshark using the path
> "kernelshark/bin" and adding "../lib" would give you "kernelshark/lib"
> directory.
> 
>   "kernelshark/bin/../lib" == "kernelshark/lib"
> 
> Also, if you were to cd to kernelshark and run
> 
>   "bin/kernelshark" the path would be "bin/../lib" which would be
>   equal to  "lib" and being in the kernelshark directory, would
>   give you the plugins directory that is the same as the previous command.
> 
> If you cd to kernelshark/bin and ran "./kernelshark" we would then use
> "./../lib" which is the same as "../lib" which is still the same path
> as the other two.
> 
> But last call we discussed a way to find the full path name of the
> binary being executed. And if that's the case, we could not only add
> "../lib" we could also check that the binary being executed is also in
> a "kernelshark/bin" first.
> 

OK, now I think I understand what you want.
Thanks!
Yordan


>>
>> and this can be very surprising behavior for the user
>>
>> The other solution has it own weaknesses, but at least it sounds like a
>> simple rule: "If you want to use the compiled version of the plugins you
>> have to start the GUI from the source code directory used to build.
>> Otherwise the installed version of the plugins will be used."
> 
> Building from source, then moving that source tree to another path
> shouldn't cause the binary to act differently.
> 
> -- Steve
>