[PATCH v3] build: select optional libraries

[Bruce Richardson]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:38:33AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:36 AM Bruce Richardson
> <bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:31:19AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 4:26 PM Bruce Richardson
> > > <bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 04:11:37PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 9:21 AM David Marchand
> > > > > <david.marchand at redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > > @@ -141,13 +137,25 @@ foreach l:libraries
> > > > > >          deps += ['eal']
> > > > > >      endif
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -    if disabled_libs.contains(l)
> > > > > > +    if not enable_libs.contains(l)
> > > > > > +        build = false
> > > > > > +        reason = 'not in enabled libraries build config'
> > > > > > +    elif disable_libs.contains(l)
> > > > > >          build = false
> > > > > >          reason = 'explicitly disabled via build config'
> > > > > > -        if dpdk_libs_deprecated.contains(l)
> > > > > > +    endif
> > > > >
> > > > > There is also a change in behavior for current users of the
> > > > > -Ddisable_libs= configuration (which was used for enabling deprecated
> > > > > libraries, for example).
> > > >
> > > > I notice the change in behaviour for enabling the deprecated libs. Is there
> > > > any other change in behaviour for current users?
> > >
> > > The only change I see, is that this implementation breaks enabling
> > > deprecated libs via disable_libs.
> > > It may break existing developer build directory and maybe some
> > > packaging scripts, this is why I am a bit puzzled.
> > >
> > > Relooking at the disable_libs option current implementation, it seems
> > > backward to pass a disable_libs option when you want to build some
> > > deprecated library.
> > > It is more straightforward to request building libraries via
> > > -Denable_libs=<deprecated_lib> explicitly or -Denable_libs=*
> > > implicitly.
> > >
> > > But again, we may be breaking something for people who relied on this behavior.
> > >
> >
> > That's what I expected, and I think that is ok. I just wanted to check that
> > the change in behaviour was only for the deprecated libs case.
> 
> Thomas, wdyt?
> It requires some release note, at least.
> 
I am assuming this is not targetting this release though, right? Assuming
23.11, we can put in a deprecation note informing of the change ahead of
time too.

/Bruce