On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:24:28AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:14:08AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 19/02/2019 15:53, Bruce Richardson:
> > > Move app to "app" directory and enable with meson build.
> > >
> > > CC: Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > MAINTAINERS | 2 +-
> > > app/Makefile | 1 +
> > > {test => app}/cmdline_test/Makefile | 0
> > > {test => app}/cmdline_test/cmdline_test.c | 0
> > > {test => app}/cmdline_test/cmdline_test.h | 0
> > > {test => app}/cmdline_test/cmdline_test.py | 0
> > > {test => app}/cmdline_test/cmdline_test_data.py | 0
> > > {test => app}/cmdline_test/commands.c | 0
> >
> > Sorry, I didn't realize before,
> > other test apps directories are named test-*.
> > Shouldn't we name this one test-cmdline?
> >
> Looking into it now, changing the directory name is easy enough, however
> the final binary produced is also called cmdline_test - should it be
> changed too? Changing it would be a bit more invasive, and would be
> user-visible (perhaps just to test suites), but would lead to more
> consistency.
>
> NOTE: this only applies to the "make" build, since the meson build uses the
> directory name as the binary name, so it's already consistent. There is no
> user visible change here, since the app wasn't available from meson builds
> before.
>
> My recommendation is therefore to rename the directory only, and leave the
> binary name the same for make builds, given that when we switch completely
> over to meson it will be consistent at that point.
>
Implemented in V3 patchset.
