[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

Hi Pierre-Marc,

Just tried UST on my machine and ran into the basic deployment nit:
ldconfig is not executed by the make install script, so usttrace could
not find the shared object. There was a message saying that in the log
file, but this can be a major inconvenience for new users.

Can you add a ldconfig execution to the make install script ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

another nit:

looking at a recorded trace in 

compudj at ok:~/.usttraces/ok-20100810110729951540364$

notice how long is the date identifier. When I have two traces gathered
on the same day, tab completion is rally a pain to do because the
numbers start with the same date. Can you simply put a separator between
the date and time of day (a dash "-" would be fine) ?

Thanks,

MAthieu


* Mathieu Desnoyers (compudj at krystal.dyndns.org) wrote:
> Hi Pierre-Marc,
> 
> Just tried UST on my machine and ran into the basic deployment nit:
> ldconfig is not executed by the make install script, so usttrace could
> not find the shared object. There was a message saying that in the log
> file, but this can be a major inconvenience for new users.
> 
> Can you add a ldconfig execution to the make install script ?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mathieu
> 
> -- 
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Pierre-Marc Fournier]

On 08/10/2010 10:10 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> another nit:
>
> looking at a recorded trace in
>
> compudj at ok:~/.usttraces/ok-20100810110729951540364$
>
> notice how long is the date identifier. When I have two traces gathered
> on the same day, tab completion is rally a pain to do because the
> numbers start with the same date. Can you simply put a separator between
> the date and time of day (a dash "-" would be fine) ?
>

How will adding a dash help tab completion? The directories will still 
start with the same date.

May I suggest selection-pasting the path? It's faster than tab 
completion when you have several traces.

pmf

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

* Pierre-Marc Fournier (pierre-marc.fournier at polymtl.ca) wrote:
> On 08/10/2010 10:10 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> another nit:
>>
>> looking at a recorded trace in
>>
>> compudj at ok:~/.usttraces/ok-20100810110729951540364$
>>
>> notice how long is the date identifier. When I have two traces gathered
>> on the same day, tab completion is rally a pain to do because the
>> numbers start with the same date. Can you simply put a separator between
>> the date and time of day (a dash "-" would be fine) ?
>>
>
> How will adding a dash help tab completion? The directories will still  
> start with the same date.
>

Users trying to find out what to complete with in the middle of a large
chunk of numbers might have a hard time finding the correct spot without
a separator somewhere.

>
> May I suggest selection-pasting the path? It's faster than tab  
> completion when you have several traces.

Yes, you can suggest 'best practices' as much as you want, but some
people will still try to use tab completion, and this will be a
frustrating experience. Please add the '-' and don't frustrate your
users.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[David Goulet]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Didn't you had a compilation warning :  warning: "container_of" redefined

Since the introduction of "define ____cacheline_aligned" that is using
urcu-bp.h, i'm getting that error. I did remember sending a patch that fixed
this issues to you Pierre-Marc ?

Thanks
David

On 10-08-10 10:06 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi Pierre-Marc,
> 
> Just tried UST on my machine and ran into the basic deployment nit:
> ldconfig is not executed by the make install script, so usttrace could
> not find the shared object. There was a message saying that in the log
> file, but this can be a major inconvenience for new users.
> 
> Can you add a ldconfig execution to the make install script ?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mathieu
> 

- -- 
David Goulet
LTTng project, DORSAL Lab.

1024D/16BD8563
BE3C 672B 9331 9796 291A  14C6 4AF7 C14B 16BD 8563
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkxhXyAACgkQSvfBSxa9hWNtzACeOX1L9TNv/A+Bo4QuYPUe8GYo
x+UAmwQIAdaKQm2cGTVMXHoa0fYbzBVT
=5vc1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Pierre-Marc Fournier]

On 08/10/2010 10:16 AM, David Goulet wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Didn't you had a compilation warning :  warning: "container_of" redefined
>
> Since the introduction of "define ____cacheline_aligned" that is using
> urcu-bp.h, i'm getting that error. I did remember sending a patch that fixed
> this issues to you Pierre-Marc ?

No getting this problem. Are you using liburcu 0.4.6?

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

* Pierre-Marc Fournier (pierre-marc.fournier at polymtl.ca) wrote:
> On 08/10/2010 10:16 AM, David Goulet wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Didn't you had a compilation warning :  warning: "container_of" redefined
>>
>> Since the introduction of "define ____cacheline_aligned" that is using
>> urcu-bp.h, i'm getting that error. I did remember sending a patch that fixed
>> this issues to you Pierre-Marc ?
>
> No getting this problem. Are you using liburcu 0.4.6?

URCU head, not released yet. I recommended David to do a fix with:

#ifndef container_of
...
#endif

in UST to make the transition easier.

Thanks,

Mathieu

>
> _______________________________________________
> ltt-dev mailing list
> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Pierre-Marc Fournier]

On 08/10/2010 10:06 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi Pierre-Marc,
>
> Just tried UST on my machine and ran into the basic deployment nit:
> ldconfig is not executed by the make install script, so usttrace could
> not find the shared object. There was a message saying that in the log
> file, but this can be a major inconvenience for new users.
>
> Can you add a ldconfig execution to the make install script ?

Isn't the standard with automake-built projects is to let the user run 
ldconfig by himself? The installation instructions for ust mention the 
need to run ldconfig after installation, and in my mind, making the 
install script run ldconfig on the user's system is taking too much 
liberty and too surprising. I'll be convinced otherwise if you can 
provide examples of notable projects that do so.

Thanks.

pmf

[ltt-dev] UST usability nit

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

* Pierre-Marc Fournier (pierre-marc.fournier at polymtl.ca) wrote:
> On 08/10/2010 10:06 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> Hi Pierre-Marc,
>>
>> Just tried UST on my machine and ran into the basic deployment nit:
>> ldconfig is not executed by the make install script, so usttrace could
>> not find the shared object. There was a message saying that in the log
>> file, but this can be a major inconvenience for new users.
>>
>> Can you add a ldconfig execution to the make install script ?
>
> Isn't the standard with automake-built projects is to let the user run  
> ldconfig by himself? The installation instructions for ust mention the  
> need to run ldconfig after installation, and in my mind, making the  
> install script run ldconfig on the user's system is taking too much  
> liberty and too surprising. I'll be convinced otherwise if you can  
> provide examples of notable projects that do so.

Looking around, here is what some other projects do:
(http://osdir.com/ml/linux.drivers.gnokii/2003-07/msg00062.html)

So then let's settle for having

make install

print a message at the end, e.g.:

"Note: You may need to run ldconfig on your system."

We can assume that the average user will expect that

./configure
make
make install

will do the job for a userspace application. So we should tell them if a
supplementary step is needed. Again, it's in the spirit of making
adoption as easy and smooth as possible for the user.

Thanks,

Mathieu

>
> Thanks.
>
> pmf
>

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com