> From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > Sent: Friday, 23 June 2023 13.04 > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 11:35:29AM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > > Hello Bruce, > > > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:43 AM Bruce Richardson > > <bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 07:00:57PM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > > > > Rework deprecated libraries selection by introducing a new configuration > > > > option. > > > > > > > > This breaks existing configurations that were relying on disable_libs='' > > > > for enabling deprecated libraries. > > > > On the other hand, it will make enabling optional libraries more > > > > straightforward by taking the deprecated libraries out of the picture. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> > > > > > > This gives us a single on/off value for the deprecated libs. So if you > > > wants to build only a single deprecated lib, you need to turn on this > > > option and then use "disable_libs/enable_libs" option to then selectively > > > pick which of the deprecated libs you actually want. Is that the expected > > > behaviour? Just checking that we don't want this to be a list too. > > > > Yes, I wanted a single unified filtering stage. > > > > But I think your suggestion is easier to use. > > Slightly easier for the simple case. > > > > > - That would make it simpler for people who simply want to enable kni, > > as you mentionned before: > > $ meson setup plop -Denable_deprecated_libs=kni > > > > But I would make this list not overlap with the disable/enable_libs > > options evaluation. > > Otherwise, in the case of a enable_libs user, the user would have to > > set kni in both lists, which is not that great: > > $ meson setup plop -Denable_deprecated_libs=kni -Denable_libs=kni,vhost > > > > Instead, I would make it so the config is done as: > > $ meson setup plop -Denable_deprecated_libs=kni -Denable_libs=vhost > > > > Is this what you had in mind? > > > I'm not sure myself what I had in mind, just asking if it had been > considered as much as anything else. > > Having them not-overlap would seem to be necessary to provide a meaningful > interface. > > > > > - I don't have a usage for this, but if we go with separating > > deprecated and "normal" optional libs filtering, should I introduce a > > disable_deprecated_libs too? > > > > That would give us *way* to many options. I think for the sake of simplicity > we probably are as well to just go with what you are proposing in this set. > Since we only have two deprecated libraries - and hopefully never many more - > the benefit of the list for that setting is probably minimal. I'm keen to > avoid too much complexity if we can manage it.
I strongly agree with Bruce about avoiding too many options. Here's an idea: How about just having the disable/enable_libs options, and by default omit the deprecated libs. Then, the deprecated libs can be enabled by using the enable_libs option. Do we have special treatment for deprecated drivers?
