Re: [PATCH v3] build: select optional libraries

[David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:36 AM Bruce Richardson
<bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:31:19AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 4:26 PM Bruce Richardson
> > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 04:11:37PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 9:21 AM David Marchand
> > > > <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > @@ -141,13 +137,25 @@ foreach l:libraries
> > > > >          deps += ['eal']
> > > > >      endif
> > > > >
> > > > > -    if disabled_libs.contains(l)
> > > > > +    if not enable_libs.contains(l)
> > > > > +        build = false
> > > > > +        reason = 'not in enabled libraries build config'
> > > > > +    elif disable_libs.contains(l)
> > > > >          build = false
> > > > >          reason = 'explicitly disabled via build config'
> > > > > -        if dpdk_libs_deprecated.contains(l)
> > > > > +    endif
> > > >
> > > > There is also a change in behavior for current users of the
> > > > -Ddisable_libs= configuration (which was used for enabling deprecated
> > > > libraries, for example).
> > >
> > > I notice the change in behaviour for enabling the deprecated libs. Is there
> > > any other change in behaviour for current users?
> >
> > The only change I see, is that this implementation breaks enabling
> > deprecated libs via disable_libs.
> > It may break existing developer build directory and maybe some
> > packaging scripts, this is why I am a bit puzzled.
> >
> > Relooking at the disable_libs option current implementation, it seems
> > backward to pass a disable_libs option when you want to build some
> > deprecated library.
> > It is more straightforward to request building libraries via
> > -Denable_libs=<deprecated_lib> explicitly or -Denable_libs=*
> > implicitly.
> >
> > But again, we may be breaking something for people who relied on this behavior.
> >
>
> That's what I expected, and I think that is ok. I just wanted to check that
> the change in behaviour was only for the deprecated libs case.

Thomas, wdyt?
It requires some release note, at least.



-- 
David Marchand