Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: add missing long-options for short option arguments

[David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 01:09:16PM -0600, Keith Wiles wrote:
>>> A number of short options for EAL are missing long options
>>> and this patch adds those missing options.
>>>
>>> The missing long options are for:
>>> -c add --coremask
>>> -d add --driver
>>> -l add --corelist
>>> -m add --memsize
>>> -n add --mem-channels
>>> -r add --mem-ranks
>>> -v add --version
>>> Add an alias for --lcores using --lcore-map
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>
>>
>>Why do we need long options for all the short options?
>
> I think we need the long options to match the short options just because it makes sense to me to have long options for all short options. Take the case of -v, just about everyone else has a —version long-option, but we do not.
>
> The real reason is to allow for DPDK configuration via a configuration file and I wanted to use the same strings for the config file variables as the command line options. I figured I would add the long options now as they do not effect the configuration file patch.

No strong opinion on this.

Just, why "memsize" with no -  but "mem-channels" ?
And why cut down to mem rather than memory ?


-- 
David Marchand