From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A5205697 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:18:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Oct 2015 02:18:49 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,706,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="815072106" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.208.65]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 20 Oct 2015 02:17:29 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 20 Oct 2015 10:17:29 +0025 Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 10:17:29 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: "Arevalo, Mario Alfredo C" Message-ID: <20151020091728.GA17840@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <6594B51DBE477C48AAE23675314E6C460F1B724F@fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6594B51DBE477C48AAE23675314E6C460F1B724F@fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com> Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] dpdk proposal installation process X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:18:50 -0000 On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:21:00AM +0000, Arevalo, Mario Alfredo C wrote: > Hi folks, > > Good day, this is a proposal in order to improve the dpdk install process, > I would like to know your point of view about the next points according to > previous conversations :) in order to create a new patches version. > > 1) I think the first thing that I have to be aware is "compatibility", the > new changes won't affect the current dpdk behaviour. > > 2) Create new makefile rules, these rules is going to install dpdk files in > default paths, however the linux distributions don't use the same paths for their > files, the linux distribution and the architecture can be factor for different > path as Panu commented in previous conversations, he is right, then all variables > could be overridden, the variables names for the user can be included in documentation. > Also an option could be a configuration file for paths, however I'm not sure. > > 3) The default paths for dpdk in order to follow a hierarchy, however the variable > with those values can be overridden. > > -install-bin --> /usr/bin. > -install-headers --> /usr/include/dpdk > -install-lib --> /usr/lib64 > -install-doc --> /usr/share/doc/dpdk > -install-mod --> if RTE_EXEC_ENV=linuxapp then KERNEL_DIR=/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/extra/drivers/dpdk > else KERNEL_DIR=/boot/modules). > -install-sdk --> /usr/share/dpdk and call install-headers ). > -install-fhs --> call install-libraries, install-mod, install-bin and install-doc (maybe install-headers) > > 4) I'm going to take account all feedback about variables, paths etc for the new version :). > > Thank you so much for your help. > > > Mario. Hi Mario, that seems like a lot of commands to add - are they all individually needed? In terms of where things go, should the "usr" part not a) be configurable via a parameter, and b) default to "/usr/local" as that's where user-installed software from outside the packaging system normally gets put. /Bruce