Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Improve optional lib support

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

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 3:22 PM Bruce Richardson
<bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
>
> This patchset builds on the previous v1 and v2, and the discussion
> which followed about what libraries should be optional. While still
> a long way to go from the position suggested in the v2 discussion,
> this set moves us a bit further along the road.
>
> The first patch is a direct v3 from previous versions, changing the
> tracking from a list of optional libs to a list of mandatory ones.
> The second patch then knocks off another 5 libs off the mandatory
> list - all are libs which should have few dependencies in other
> components, but which some common sample apps like l3fwd depend upon.
> It should be possible to make other libs optional in future, but to
> do so likely requires code-changes to #ifdef out support in places.
>
> To that end, patch 3 is an RFC to add support for "optional libs" to
> the build system. For now, nothing uses this, but it may be useful if
> someone does want to take on the task of removing a hard dependency
> from one component on another and making it optional.
>
> Bruce Richardson (3):
>   build: track mandatory rather than optional libs
>   build: remove 5 libs from mandatory list
>   build: RFC - add support for optional dependencies

I was not sure if I should take the third patch, but the two others
make sense to me and I applied them.
The third one can be reconsidered when the need arises.


Thanks Bruce.

-- 
David Marchand