On 02/23/2016 10:07 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm reviving this old thread.
Thanks.
> My understanding is that everybody prefer the linker script
> than the current combined library which had neither symbol versioning
> nor library dependency informations.
Yeah it seemed to me most (i
Hi,
I'm reviving this old thread.
My understanding is that everybody prefer the linker script
than the current combined library which had neither symbol versioning
nor library dependency informations.
Comments below:
2015-11-24 16:31, Panu Matilainen:
> The physically linked-together combined li
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 05:03:26PM +, Robie Basak wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 06:44:19AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> > Theres nothing "complex" about the simple fact that a project builds lots of
> > libraries. Its extreemely common. Any graphic window manager has exactly
> > the
> > sam
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 06:44:19AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> Theres nothing "complex" about the simple fact that a project builds lots of
> libraries. Its extreemely common. Any graphic window manager has exactly the
> same situation, as do any number of tools that have multiple hardware backend
Hi,
FYI I kind of "gave up" (not as bad as it sounds) and started looking into
shipping it as individual libraries + linker script as well.
To me it seemed what was more accepted in all the former discussions.
It will surely cause more work for me in the short term, but I hope after
the initial hi
Hi Christian,
You can count on me to help testing DPDK for Ubuntu, I have plans for it!
I have some experience with Debian packaging too... I'm currently
maintaining few Ubuntu PPAs, for fun...=)
Also, I have hardware available, with 10G, 40G and 100G NIC cards and
traffic generators.
I
2015-11-24 16:31, Panu Matilainen:
> The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
> source of problems, as was predicted when library and symbol versioning
> was introduced. Replace the complex and fragile construction with a
> simple linker script which achieves the same
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 01:31:33AM +, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 06:44:19AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 12:37:37PM +, Robie Basak wrote:
> > > Re-sending this unsigned since the ML rejected my signed email.
> > >
> > > -1 from Ubuntu without fur
Hi Ferruh,
while not tackling the "soname for combined lib" which I felt to be
the center of all this discussion.
I like that with your patch the symbols in the combined lib are no
more anonymous, but versioned according to the maps the DPDK sub
libraries are maintaining anyway.
Some more technical
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 06:44:19AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 12:37:37PM +, Robie Basak wrote:
> > Re-sending this unsigned since the ML rejected my signed email.
> >
> > -1 from Ubuntu without further discussion since it will break us. Please
> > don't commit this pat
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 12:37:37PM +, Robie Basak wrote:
> Re-sending this unsigned since the ML rejected my signed email.
>
> -1 from Ubuntu without further discussion since it will break us. Please
> don't commit this patch yet.
>
> I don't understand why we must have the complexity of so m
On 11/30/2015 06:41 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 10:03:43 -0500
> Neil Horman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 08:08:37AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:38:48 +0200
>>> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>>
On 11/25/2015 12:46 AM, Stephen Hemminger w
Re-sending this unsigned since the ML rejected my signed email.
-1 from Ubuntu without further discussion since it will break us. Please
don't commit this patch yet.
I don't understand why we must have the complexity of so many shared
libraries. From a distribution packaging perspective, all I se
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:21:02PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Adding a soname and a semi-arbitrary version does not fix the fundamental
> problems:
>
> Since the library lumps together everything in DPDK, you'd have to bump its
> version whenever any of the individual libraries bumps its vers
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 12:36:15PM +, Robie Basak wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:21:02PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > Adding a soname and a semi-arbitrary version does not fix the fundamental
> > problems:
> >
> > Since the library lumps together everything in DPDK, you'd have to bum
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 08:41:02AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 10:03:43 -0500
> Neil Horman wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 08:08:37AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:38:48 +0200
> > > Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 11/25/2015
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 08:08:37AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:38:48 +0200
> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
> > On 11/25/2015 12:46 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:31:17 +0200
> > > Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > >
> > >> The physically linked-togethe
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 10:03:43 -0500
Neil Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 08:08:37AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:38:48 +0200
> > Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >
> > > On 11/25/2015 12:46 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:31:17 +0200
> >
On 11/25/2015 06:08 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:38:48 +0200
> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
>> On 11/25/2015 12:46 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:31:17 +0200
>>> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>>
The physically linked-together combined library has been
On 11/25/2015 12:46 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:31:17 +0200
> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
>> The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
>> source of problems, as was predicted when library and symbol versioning
>> was introduced. Replace the compl
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:38:48 +0200
Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 12:46 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:31:17 +0200
> > Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >
> >> The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
> >> source of problems, as was predicted
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 10:38:48AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 12:46 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:31:17 +0200
> >Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >
> >>The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
> >>source of problems, as was predicte
The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
source of problems, as was predicted when library and symbol versioning
was introduced. Replace the complex and fragile construction with a
simple linker script which achieves the same without all the problems,
remove the relate
Neil Horman writes:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 04:31:17PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
>> source of problems, as was predicted when library and symbol versioning
>> was introduced. Replace the complex and fragile constructio
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:31:17 +0200
Panu Matilainen wrote:
> The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
> source of problems, as was predicted when library and symbol versioning
> was introduced. Replace the complex and fragile construction with a
> simple linker script
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 04:31:17PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> The physically linked-together combined library has been an increasing
> source of problems, as was predicted when library and symbol versioning
> was introduced. Replace the complex and fragile construction with a
> simple linker s
26 matches
Mail list logo
