[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 20.11 02/19] build: remove makefiles and mk directory

[Gaëtan Rivet]

On 07/08/20 19:31 +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 7:04 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/7/2020 2:23 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 06:49:47PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 6:15 PM Bruce Richardson
> > >> <bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 01:29:52PM +0100, Ciara Power wrote:
> > >>>> It was decided [1] to no longer support Make in DPDK, this patch
> > >>>> removes all Makefiles that do not make use of pkg-config, along with
> > >>>> the mk directory previously used by make.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> [1] https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-April/162839.html
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ciara Power <ciara.power at intel.com>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>>  GNUmakefile                                   |  17 -
> > >>>>  Makefile                                      |   4 -
> > >>>
> > >>> Open question from me:
> > >>> Do we want to leave a dummy top-level makefile that prints instructions on
> > >>> build with meson and ninja - or even runs a build using them if they are
> > >>> installed?
> > >>
> > >> Maybe we can keep "make tags" as well in top-level Makefile.
> > >
> > > Is it better to point people directly to the script? My concern about
> > > having a makefile is that it may confuse people as to how to build DPDK.
> > > On the other side, there is a convenience aspect to having a makefile, so
> > > I'm open to being convinced either way.
> 
> I was looking more of a convenience point of view.
> Can we check how other meson based projects deal with similar problems?
> 
> > >
> >
> > A dummy Makefile to print instructions may be helpful for people missed the
> > change, I am for having it.
> >
> > But I am dubious on extending it, like for tags, although I found it useful I
> > think we should integrate it to meson instead.
> 
> I think, we can not integrate such stuff with meson. If we can with meson,
> I agree we should take that path.

+1 to provide basic and short instructions to use meson when someone
tries to use make.

On the other hand I think tag generation should not be part of the build
system. The only dependency of build-tags.sh on make is for `make
showconfigs`, they can probably be listed without using make.

The scripts seems standalone, why keep make to call it? The config
target could be inferred if that's the issue?

-- 
Gaëtan