[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: replace testpmd with ./<build_dir>/app/dpdk-testpmd in all commands

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 2/10/2021 11:56 AM, Sarosh Arif wrote:
> replace testpmd with ./<build_dir>/app/dpdk-testpmd in all commands
> because on compilation through meson, dpdk-testpmd is the default
> application name.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sarosh Arif <sarosh.arif at emumba.com>
> ---
>   doc/guides/nics/bnxt.rst    | 8 ++++----
>   doc/guides/nics/e1000em.rst | 2 +-
>   doc/guides/nics/kni.rst     | 4 ++--
>   doc/guides/nics/mlx4.rst    | 2 +-
>   doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst    | 2 +-
>   doc/guides/nics/qede.rst    | 2 +-
>   doc/guides/nics/virtio.rst  | 2 +-
>   7 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/bnxt.rst b/doc/guides/nics/bnxt.rst
> index 801ec3ca5..1e2f78a2e 100644
> --- a/doc/guides/nics/bnxt.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/bnxt.rst
> @@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ The application enables multiple TX and RX queues when it is started.
>   
>   .. code-block:: console
>   
> -    testpmd -l 1,3,5 --main-lcore 1 --txq=2 –rxq=2 --nb-cores=2
> +    ./<build_dir>/app/dpdk-testpmd -l 1,3,5 --main-lcore 1 --txq=2 –rxq=2 --nb-cores=2
>   

Ok to replace 'testpmd' -> 'dpdk-testpmd', but do we really need to add the 
relative path?
Users can be calling the application from installed folder, and this additional 
information brings additional maintenance cost with a small to none benefit, 
what do you think to drop the folder path?