From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f175.google.com (mail-wr0-f175.google.com [209.85.128.175]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A278D003 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:12:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr0-f175.google.com with SMTP id u1so96940082wra.2 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 03:12:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ISdYkVKjfo5sgtAfUS09IReCB2510b9bEq4w4JQSN4c=; b=xC34eWwdh8Y/RVYA5si9Nw/b042wMJK1UkZvde7WpNzEJh3/vjiZuRFa1hqo03SCyS 82nscUO4pbz+yOUSqSJwGFau6f1jVGFVUHQkV9DsHvxHFSIp8q6/27bEqQ0klrYjMKXK Y1ELR9QoidKVEOhO4zp2PHAN8TwVfRdRd/rqbe7TuHLqu2nBsRhl6L9oUj43qhuN70R/ GBYPKpMhQasj57k4odqGFea0/L+mwhcKclIrxt7T1SSdERPJZl/trKoFtB5E86biDAB0 Ijjf62ZYjUbC2koOV1ZfG3biW6+jMkRGcGxthWL1fQDyPB/PSpWEGQg0jQ8TMrdWr9Uo 6ngg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ISdYkVKjfo5sgtAfUS09IReCB2510b9bEq4w4JQSN4c=; b=JZckJO7R0ZqKA+aOODobFbVF6cth4C1wBlRYRK/un/Sy/N9St8zkyMpXDjD69M0n2D 6eMtpgNponQZtucX7uoaWh0QRFbUpKZaHytXZw1wAmrUdkSoMmPqlBKQswAS9USWx08/ sv9C0SxGTjhGyg/Viafpg6cm8G6n+VDA2EvtFcCdQdbvYerRgxhnjwJYrlj0b/1ZN9/n ECnXRXSkwYM8lT/fI+iZUZf53PqzWAp22M0TCcAN2FCKazCtDO7/8HseVlHuryPgBkvq zvcMD0yFpFDvCDGOw1vSXQUwAHUcriEicTraYCN+0ZH8ZtapmRXvf/jwX5Ge0lg3OiJ5 l7lw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2InzflorbEwfeZIYiFBJdA0PYEoWFoSeDVjrLOMMZ//UhVWQVFVWUIE9UfhrHmzgtr X-Received: by 10.28.71.87 with SMTP id u84mr13835605wma.101.1490695947715; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 03:12:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 65sm4215585wri.68.2017.03.28.03.12.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Mar 2017 03:12:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" Cc: "Richardson, Bruce" , "Legacy, Allain (Wind River)" , dev@dpdk.org, "yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com" , techboard@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:12:26 +0200 Message-ID: <82821129.A9hgLN2u53@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891265277FF85@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1488482971-170522-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <22590962.V8IQgtpKlO@xps13> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891265277FF85@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/6] librte_cfgfile enhancements X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:12:28 -0000 2017-03-28 09:58, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > > > As follow-up to my own mail, for this specific library example, I > > > wouldn't look to remove it from DPDK anyway. Parsing ini files is fairly > > > trivial, so I think it's not a big deal to keep our own version and not > > > have an external dependency - especially since it's already there and not > > > a big maintenance burden. > > > > Removing this lib would not disable anything as it is used only by examples. > > I don't see what would be the issue. > > We just have to download the lib when building the example app. > > It can be done quite easily in the makefile. > > Thomas, more than 3 quarters of DPDK libs are only used by applications, is this a reason to remove them? > > Also, I think the purpose of DPDK is to enable people to write applications, not more libraries. Would you agree? We should make the life easier for the application developers, not libraries. > > This library is an important utility for applications, similar to librte_cmdline and others. I think it is not fair from your side to refer to librte_cfgfile without any reference to librte_cmdline. I agree Cristian. I was just writing another email about removing librte_cmdline: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/061777.html This thread was about librte_cfgfile. I hope you'll agree I am really fair :) It is really a scope question and should be managed by the techboard (CC). > > > For newer functionalty, we do need clear guidelines as to when it is > > > acceptable to add new dependencies to DPDK. I'd love to see us enable > > > the PCAP PMD by default, for instance, and I think Sergio has recently > > > proposed we also require libnuma on Linux. > > > > We won't include libpcap or libnuma. > > The only thing we should do is to make easier to view and enable > > dependencies.