On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:28:24AM -0700, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On 19 January 2018 at 08:55, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <a...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > Em Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 08:24:56AM -0700, Mathieu Poirier escreveu:
> >> On 19 January 2018 at 08:12, Jiri Olsa <jo...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:58:19AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >> >> Em Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 03:27:43PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> >> >> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:14:23AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > > Em Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 02:59:48PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> >> >> > > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:41:39AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de
> >> >> > > > Melo wrote:
> >> >> > > > > Shouldn't libopencsd be treated like libbabeltrace was
> >> >> > > > > before
> >> >> > > > > the required version was widely available in distros?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > > I.e. these csets should have the rationale for that:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > > Enabling it once it became widely available:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > > 24787afbcd01 ("perf tools: Enable LIBBABELTRACE by default")
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > > Disabling it because we would need to get things from
> >> >> > > > > tarballs/git
> >> >> > > > > repos, build it in our machines, as requested by Ingo:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > > > 6ab2b762befd ("perf build: Disable libbabeltrace check by
> >> >> > > > > default")
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > I think at that time we did not have a way to hide the check,
> >> >> > > > now we have FEATURE_DISPLAY seprated so we can still check
> >> >> > > > for it, but users won't be bothered with [ FAIL ] output
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Ok, users won't be bothered with the fail output, but we tried hard
> >> >> > > to
> >> >> > > get the build fast by having it only test for things that are widely
> >> >> > > available, right? I.e. if we know something is not widely available
> >> >> > > then
> >> >> > > we better not try to build with it and get faster builds, wasn't
> >> >> > > that
> >> >> > > part of the rationale in the babeltrace case?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > If one has to build from sources some library, then its not a
> >> >> > > problem to
> >> >> > > have in the make command line a LIBOPENCSD=1 switch?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > right, we can do it like that
> >> >>
> >> >> So I'm applying v2 and we can go on from there, to make progress, ok?
> >> >> I'm adding your Acked-by to all but the build ones, ok?
> >> >
> >> > I think v3 was in better shape.. wrt tabs and overall display
> >> >
> >> > jirka
> >>
> >> Jiri is correct - V3 should be considered.
> >
> > So, please take a look at my perf/core branch, hopefully my mistake was
> > just on the message saying I would apply v2, check that v3 was what I
> > applied.
>
> The correct version was applied - thanks.
yep, looks good
jirka
