Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 03/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM

[Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>]

* Thomas Graf (tgraf@redhat.com) wrote:
> On 02/04/2014 04:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >Packages can be built with:
> >	RPM_BUILD_NCPUS=8 rpmbuild -ta dpdk-1.5.2r2.tar.gz
> >
> >There are packages for runtime, static libraries and development.
> >Once devel package installed, it can be used like this:
> >	make -C /usr/share/dpdk/examples/helloworld RTE_SDK=/usr/share/dpdk
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> 
> Thanks for getting this started! Some comments below. I'll be glad to
> help pushing this into Fedora.
> 
> >+Name: dpdk
> >+Version: 1.5.2r1
> >+Release: 1
> 
> What kind of upgrade strategy do you have in mind?
> 
> I'm raising this because Fedora and other distributions will require
> a unique package name for every version of the package that is not
> backwards compatible.
> 
> Typically libraries provide backwards compatible within a major release,
> i.e. all 1.x.x releases would be compatible. I realize that this might
> not be applicable yet but maybe 1.5.x?
> 
> Depending on the versioning schema the name would be dpdk15, dpdk16, ...
> or dpdk152, dpdk153, ...
> 
> >+BuildRequires: kernel-devel, kernel-headers, doxygen
> 
> Is a python environment required as well?
> 
> >+%description
> >+Dummy main package. Make only subpackages.
> 
> I would just call the main package "libdpdk152" so you don't have to
> repeat the encoding versioning in all the subpackages.
> 
> >+
> >+%package core-runtime
> 
> What about calling it just "libdpdk"?
> 
> >+Summary: Intel(r) Data Plane Development Kit core for runtime
> >+%description core-runtime
> >+Intel(r) DPDK runtime includes kernel modules, core libraries and tools.
> >+testpmd application allows to test fast packet processing environments
> >+on x86 platforms. For instance, it can be used to check that environment
> >+can support fast path applications such as 6WINDGate, pktgen, rumptcpip, etc.
> >+More libraries are available as extensions in other packages.
> >+
> >+%package core-static
> 
> Based on the above: "libdpdk-static"
> 
> Packages that link against dpdk statically will do:
> BuildRequire: libdpdk152-static
> 
> >+%files core-runtime
> >+%dir %{datadir}
> >+%{datadir}/config
> >+%{datadir}/tools
> >+%{moddir}/*
> >+%{_sbindir}/*
> >+%{_bindir}/*
> >+%{_libdir}/*.so
> 
> This brings up the question of multiple parallel DPDK installations.
> A specific application linking to library version X will also require
> tools of version X, right? A second application linking against version
> Y will require tools version Y. Right now, these could not be installed
> in parallel. Any chance we can make the runtime version independent?
> 
> Same applies to header files. A good option here would be to install
> them to /usr/include/libdpdk{version}/ and have a dpdk-1.5.2.pc which
> provides Cflags: -I${includedir}/libdpdk${version}
> 
> >+%files core-static
> >+%{_libdir}/*.a
> >+
> >+%files core-devel
> >+%{_includedir}/*
> >+%{datadir}/mk
> >+%{datadir}/%{target}
> >+%{datadir}/examples
> >+%doc %{docdir}
> >
> 
> You'll also need for all packages and subpackages installing shared
> libraries:
> 
> %post -p /sbin/ldconfig
> %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig

Yes, thanks, I meant to mention that too.

Details here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shared_Libraries