From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A1735A58 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2015 13:57:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Nov 2015 04:57:44 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,252,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="844697725" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.208.62]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 06 Nov 2015 04:57:44 -0800 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 06 Nov 2015 12:57:42 +0025 Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 12:57:42 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20151106125742.GA19512@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1446805454-17776-1-git-send-email-bruce.richardson@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1446805454-17776-1-git-send-email-bruce.richardson@intel.com> Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] reserve 'make install' for future use 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: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 12:57:46 -0000 So, any thoughts or comments on this? There has been lots of discussion in this general area but nothing yet going into the release to try and improve the situation. Are we just going to kick the problem down the road to the 2.3 release? /Bruce On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 10:24:13AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > There has been some discussion on the list about various ways to get DPDK more > standardised in how it compiles and how it can be installed into a system as > a set of binaries. > > One of the issues we face in that is that the 'make install' command is used in > DPDK to compile a copy of the SDK but not to place the resultant binaries in the > filesystem like other packages do. In order to allow us to have the option to > use 'make install' in its common meaning in a future release we need to replace > it in our packages, and allow some time for the change to a new command to bed-in. > > This patchset therefore proposed to change "make install" to "make sdk" [and > "make uninstall" to "make clean-sdk"]. Using the old commands now prints out > an error message informing the user to use the new versions. > > These new commands are ones that made sense to me - I'm happy enough to change > them for something else people feel is more appropriate. The key point here is > to move away from using "make install". > > I would ask that if general agreement on this can be reached that such a change > be considered for 2.2, even though it is late in the day, as "freeing up" the > make install command will potentially take multiple releases as not everyone is > on the latest version, and so waiting till 2.3 to make a change will push out > any future re-use of a "make install" command by 4 months. > > Regards, > /Bruce > > Bruce Richardson (1): > mk: rename 'make install' to 'make sdk' > > doc/guides/freebsd_gsg/build_dpdk.rst | 16 ++--- > doc/guides/linux_gsg/build_dpdk.rst | 22 +++--- > doc/guides/nics/intel_vf.rst | 2 +- > doc/guides/prog_guide/dev_kit_root_make_help.rst | 18 ++--- > doc/guides/sample_app_ug/tep_termination.rst | 3 +- > doc/guides/sample_app_ug/vhost.rst | 3 +- > doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/build_app.rst | 2 +- > doc/guides/xen/pkt_switch.rst | 2 +- > mk/rte.sdk.mk | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > mk/rte.sdkinstall.mk | 87 ----------------------- > mk/rte.sdkroot.mk | 13 +++- > scripts/gen-build-mk.sh | 2 +- > 12 files changed, 133 insertions(+), 125 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 mk/rte.sdk.mk > delete mode 100644 mk/rte.sdkinstall.mk > > -- > 2.5.0 >