From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mk: allow updates to build config on make install
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 14:54:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1983230.AZ6L98DUtD@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA19761@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
2014-05-14 12:33, Richardson, Bruce:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> >
> > You would like to have a synchronization of your generated .config file
> > with the configuration template. But it's not possible for the simple
> > reason that you may have modified your .config file so there is no simple
> > correlation with the original template.
>
> Would you agree then that the ideal state matrix for a make install should
> probably be: * template unmodified, config unmodified - No issue -
> regenerate or not as best suits the code * template unmodified, config
> modified - don't regenerate, keep local config * template modified, config
> modified - flag an error, since continuing compile with old config on new
> code will lead to undefined build results, since config template changes
> rarely occur without code changes to go with them. * template modified,
> config unmodified - regenerate new config, overwriting old one, for the
> same reason above. [Optionally print out message stating that the config is
> being regenerated]
>
> Does this seem reasonable to you? The last case is the common case for me in
> development, as I've had multiple build errors and unexpected build results
> in the last week alone due to config template changes not propagating as I
> switch development branches to work on different features.
It seems reasonable.
So you plan to send a v2 with this algorithm?
--
Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-14 12:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-14 10:22 Bruce Richardson
2014-05-14 10:33 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-05-14 10:51 ` Richardson, Bruce
2014-05-14 11:55 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-05-14 12:33 ` Richardson, Bruce
2014-05-14 12:54 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2014-05-14 12:57 ` Richardson, Bruce
2014-05-14 15:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Bruce Richardson
2014-05-20 11:37 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-06-10 13:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Thomas Monjalon
2014-06-10 16:02 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-06-10 16:29 ` Richardson, Bruce
2014-06-10 16:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] " Thomas Monjalon
2014-06-10 18:43 ` Richardson, Bruce
2014-06-11 9:54 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1983230.AZ6L98DUtD@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).