[ofa-general] RE: Dapl 2 question/issue

[Kanevsky, Arkady]

No spec issues.
Just use "right" library names in dat.conf file.
Thanks,

Arkady Kanevsky                       email: arkady at netapp.com
Network Appliance Inc.               phone: 781-768-5395
1601 Trapelo Rd. - Suite 16.        Fax: 781-895-1195
Waltham, MA 02451                   central phone: 781-768-5300
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Lentini [mailto:jlentini at netapp.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 3:38 PM
> To: Arlin Davis; Kanevsky, Arkady
> Cc: Doug Ledford; general
> Subject: Re: Dapl 2 question/issue
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Arlin Davis wrote:
> 
> > Doug Ledford wrote:
> > > OK, I've been working on integrating the latest dapl 
> stuff into our
> > > RHEL5.2 product and I've come across what I think is an issue.
> > > 
> > > The dapl-2 code is not compatible with dapl-1 code, and 
> there is a 
> > > (albeit small, but still it exists) amount of work to 
> forward port code.
> > > However, you maintained the same library name (aka, 
> libdat) for both
> > > dapl-1 and dapl-2.  
> > 
> > Yes, I wanted to stay away from renaming on every major 
> release if possible.
> > But I can see your point if someone wants v1 and v2 development 
> > packages on the same system. The intention was to provide only the 
> > latest development environment with older versions 
> supported in libraries only.
> > 
> > That means that, if code were to #include
> > > <dat/dat.h> and then link against -ldat, they would get the old 
> > > dapl-1 headers and the new dapl-2 library (assuming the dapl-1 
> > > headers are installed, which realistically they need to 
> be until all 
> > > dependent code has been forward ported to dapl-2).  In order for 
> > > dapl-1 and dapl-2 libraries and devel environments to be 
> installed 
> > > simultaneously, which is what you need for a seamless 
> migration from 
> > > version 1 to 2, you need different names on the libs.  Is 
> there any 
> > > chance we can get an updated
> > > dapl-2 that actually changes the lib name to libdat2.so 
> instead of 
> > > just libdat.so?
> > 
> > I have no objections to libdat2.so.
> > 
> > James, do you see any issues? Anyone else?
> 
> I don't have any objections either. 
> 
> Arkady, are there any spec. issues?
>