From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 928A96835 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:06:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s32B80GD022032 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 07:08:00 -0400 Received: from lsx.localdomain (vpn1-7-206.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.7.206]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s32B7xMW020349; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 07:07:59 -0400 Message-ID: <533BEF8E.1050801@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 13:07:58 +0200 From: Thomas Graf Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Monjalon References: <1391529271-24606-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <1391529271-24606-8-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <530DEA9C.8060101@redhat.com> <1559189.Xkxy3b07km@xps13> In-Reply-To: <1559189.Xkxy3b07km@xps13> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.26 Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [vmxnet3-usermap PATCH 07/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM 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: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 11:06:27 -0000 On 04/02/2014 12:08 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2014-02-26 14:22, Thomas Graf: >> On 02/04/2014 04:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>> +BuildRequires: dpdk-core-devel, kernel-devel, kernel-headers >>> +Requires: dpdk-core-runtime >> >> How does the compatibility mapping look like? I assume a given vmxnet3 >> version can only be linked against certain dpdk versions? We need to >> encode that mapping in the spec file somehow. > > Since vmxnet3-usermap-1.1, any dpdk >= 1.3 is supported. > But RPM packaging is not supported for these old versions. > So do you think it's needed to encode a restriction for these old versions? The restriction is only needed if RPM packages for these old versions actually exist. On a more general note: While it is extremely nice to have this spec file to ease the building process. Fedora does not allow inclusion of external kernel modules: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#No_External_Kernel_Modules