From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6329A312 for ; Tue, 13 May 2014 21:08:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hmsreliant.think-freely.org ([2001:470:8:a08:7aac:c0ff:fec2:933b] helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1WkI49-0007Ak-53 for dev@dpdk.org; Tue, 13 May 2014 15:08:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 15:08:40 -0400 From: Neil Horman To: dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20140513190840.GB31172@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-Spam-Status: No Subject: [dpdk-dev] Heads up: Fedora packaging plans 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, 13 May 2014 19:08:39 -0000 Hey all- This isn't really germaine to dpdk development, but Thomas and Vincent, you expressed interest in my progress regarding packaging of dpdk for Fedora, so I figured I would post here in case others were interested. Please find here: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/dpdk-1.7.0-0.1.gitb20539d68.src.rpm My current effort to do so. I've made some changes from the stock spec file included in dpdk: * Modified the version and release values to be separate from the name. I did some reading on requirements for packaging and it seems we can be a bit more lax with ABI version on a pre-release I think, so I setup the N-V-R to use pre-release conventions, which makes sense, give that this is a 1.7.0 pre-release. The git tag on the relase value will get bumped as we move forward in the patch series. * Added config files to match desired configs for Fedora (i.e. disabled PMD's that require out of tree kernel modules * Removed Packager tag (Fedora doesn't use those) * Moved the package target directories to include N-V of the package in the path names. This allows for multiple versions of the dpdk to be installed in parallel (I.e. dpdk-1.7.0 files are in /lib/dpdk-1.7.0, /usr/include/dpdk-1.7.0, etc). This is how java packages allow for multiple version installs, and makes sense given ABI instability in dpdk. It will require that developers add some -I / -L paths to their makefiles to pull the proper version, but I think thats a fair tradeoff. My plan is to go through the review process with this package, and update to tagged 1.7.0 as soon as its ready. Neil