Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] Add hierarchical support to make install

[Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>]

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).