[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC] Move tools sources to the tools directory (was Re: [PATCH v2]

From: Paolo Bonzini
Subject: Re: [RFC] Move tools sources to the tools directory (was Re: [PATCH v2] MAINTAINERS: Fix the location of tools manuals)
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2021 18:55:09 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0

On 04/02/21 18:42, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 2/4/21 3:40 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 04/02/21 15:22, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta wrote:
-F: docs/interop/virtfs-proxy-helper.rst
+F: docs/tools/virtfs-proxy-helper.rst

Unrelated, but Paolo once said helpers are not tools.

I think helpers is not a good word.  However, if an executable:

- can be started directly by QEMU, or is not useful without an emulator

- is usually too complex for a user to run manually

then it should be documented in docs/interop (not docs/tools).  Their
sources however can be in tools/, that's not a problem at all.

I understand tools can be built/used standalone (no dependence),
while helpers are companion of another binary, thus dependent on it:

- we can build tools without emulator
- it is probably pointless to build an helper without its helpee
- some binaries can't be use without helpers

Maybe "companion" is a better candidate to describe?

I don't think we use the word helper anymore in the build system, so really the only thing left is whether the documentation goes in tools/ or interop/.

The sources can be in tools/ unconditionally if people decide that's desirable, either with or without subdirectories. I didn't propose that because the Meson change was big enough and it can be the decision of individual maintainers.

Moving the individual tools is easy enough, since most of them are just one source file, however moving the executables would require changes in the tests and son on.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]