From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E05627E1B
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  3 Oct 2014 02:46:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [2001:470:8:a08:215:ff:fecc:4872] (helo=localhost)
 by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63)
 (envelope-from <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>)
 id 1XZr6x-0004vM-M2; Thu, 02 Oct 2014 20:52:45 -0400
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 20:52:41 -0400
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
Message-ID: <20141003005241.GA17181@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>
 <20141002211055.GA30270@mhcomputing.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20141002211055.GA30270@mhcomputing.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--)
X-Spam-Status: No
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Fix build issues with
 CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS=y
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: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 00:46:08 -0000

On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 02:10:55PM -0700, Matthew Hall wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 04:24:51PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > This seems somewhat irrelevant to the patch.  The default configuration is
> > already the way you want it to be, shared library performance is actually very
> > close to static performance, and yes, people can choose how they want to build.
> > Not sure what point your trying to make here.
> > Neil
> 
> According to my reading, one of the subpatches threatened to disable the 
> single static libs when the grouped one is built. If you are working with 
> multiple DPDK apps, and one expects COMBINE_LIBS and the other does not, you 
> can't use both with the same copy of DPDK anymore if that subpatch gets 
> committed.
> 
Ah, sorry, I misread, and thought you were advoating for making static builds
the default over dynamic builds, which made no sense to me, as that was already
the case.

Neil

> Matthew.
>