From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pmatilai@redhat.com>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4548DA3
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 12:36:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
(int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22])
by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0806F341AC2;
Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:36:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from dhcp195.koti.laiskiainen.org (vpn1-6-117.ams2.redhat.com
[10.36.6.117])
by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id
t8MAaXKR011997; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 06:36:34 -0400
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
Mario Carrillo <mario.alfredo.c.arevalo@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
References: <1442608390-12537-1-git-send-email-mario.alfredo.c.arevalo@intel.com>
<5600F549.20000@redhat.com> <56010A91.5020607@6wind.com>
<56011296.7060502@redhat.com> <56011898.6090207@6wind.com>
<56012A12.5030909@redhat.com>
From: Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <56012F31.1080800@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:36:33 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56012A12.5030909@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.22
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] Add hierarchical support to make install
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
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>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:36:36 -0000
On 09/22/2015 01:14 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 09/22/2015 12:00 PM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 09/22/2015 10:34 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>> On 09/22/2015 11:00 AM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
>>>> Actually, the current "install" directive means: install all stuff
>>>> required to build a project for the specified targets (example:
>>>> x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc).
>>>>
>>>> If we just do "make install T=${target}", the target is installed
>>>> into the current SDK source. Adding DESTDIR will install the binary
>>>> DPDK in a new directory. Example:
>>>>
>>>> make -j32 T="*-native-linuxapp-gcc" DESTDIR=/tmp/binary-dpdk install
>>>>
>>>> In both cases, the result can be used to build an application (like
>>>> the one found in examples) using the the DPDK framework. So, the
>>>> current
>>>> "install" directive should be understood as "install binary sdk".
>>>
>>> I know. What it now does is the very problem being addressed :)
>>>
>>> The current behavior is just so alien to the rest of the OSS world it
>>> actually creates an extra barrier of entry to the project. Besides that,
>>> it forces people to manually do the cp/mv dance instead - witness
>>> %install in pkg/dpdk.spec. It also unnecessarily rebuilds stuff when it
>>> should be just copying.
>>
>> I agree, I was just trying to summarize what the "install" does
>> right now, I don't say it's the proper behavior.
>
> Oh, ok.
>
>>>> From what I understand, what Mario wants to add is a "install runtime
>>>> libraries" directive.
>>>
>>> Its not limited to runtime libraries, it installs headers and such too.
>>> The point, AFAICS, is have "make install" do what people actually expect
>>> it to do - a system-wide installation. Principle of least surprise
>>> and all.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree that using H=1 is maybe not the clearest solution. What about
>>>> renaming the "install" directive to:
>>>> - install-sdk
>>>> - install-runtime
>>>>
>>>> It would help to keep the current behavior of "install" for some time,
>>>> marking it as deprecated.
>>>
>>> Nothing wrong with having separate targets for installing runtime- and
>>> sdk-specific bits, but thats not the point here.
>>
>> Hmm I think it is.
>
> "make install" usually installs everything, including headers,
> documentation etc on top of binaries and libraries. Thats more or less
> what the patches here do. For packaging purposes they're usually split
> up to different sub-packages and in the make-system there usually are
> separate targets for the individual elements like install-doc.
>
> The notion of SDK in DPDK is something entirely different from how the
> average OSS project is used in development of other software. Some
> projects like pktgen-dpdk rely on the SDK structure, mk snippets and
> scripts and all, others like openvswitch try to deal with it more like
> it was any old OSS citizen.
...so...
Talking about "runtime" misses the point, it'd be more like:
- install-sdk (for current dpdk specific sdk hierarchy)
- install-fhs (for filesystem hierarchy standard)
Getting the latter implemented would be the first step (which is what
these patches are about, even if the details differ). Changing default
behavior is a kind of different question (that I dragged into the
picture, sorry for mixing it up).