From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFAA18DA6 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:48:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Nov 2015 02:48:50 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,275,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="682873021" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.208.62]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 11 Nov 2015 02:48:48 -0800 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:48:47 +0025 Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:48:47 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: "Arevalo, Mario Alfredo C" Message-ID: <20151111104847.GA31936@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1442608390-12537-1-git-send-email-mario.alfredo.c.arevalo@intel.com> <1447175260-26162-1-git-send-email-mario.alfredo.c.arevalo@intel.com> <6594B51DBE477C48AAE23675314E6C460F77F334@fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6594B51DBE477C48AAE23675314E6C460F77F334@fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com> Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Venegas Munoz, Jos C" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 00/10] Add installation rules for dpdk files 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, 11 Nov 2015 10:48:52 -0000 On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:25:39PM +0000, Arevalo, Mario Alfredo C wrote: > Hi Aaron, > > > I have been working on series of patches in order to improve > the installation process of dpdk, I sent my first version at > sep 18. > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-September/023761.html > > I have been received feedback from different developers as > Olivier, Bruce, Panu etc... and I have been taking note about it > and I have been improving the patches in each serie, at this > moment I haven't gotten a final answer, however I'm going to continue > working. :) > > Mario. > Thanks. Hi Mario, it would be good if you could share your opinions of the patchset that Aaron linked to below, and how it might interact with or impact your patchset - or if you even think it's not worthwhile doing. There's been a worrying lack of comment on that thread! On your patchset, I'm just not convinced that adding in a whole set of new make targets is the best way to go here. It seems more like putting an extra layer of complexity in without fixing the underlying problems [which to me is the fact of "make install" being used in a non-standard way.] Regards, /Bruce > ________________________________________ > From: Aaron Conole [aconole@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 9:18 AM > To: Arevalo, Mario Alfredo C > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Venegas Munoz, Jos C; Richardson, Bruce > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 00/10] Add installation rules for dpdk files > > Hi Mario, > > Mario Carrillo writes: > > DPDK package lacks of a mechanism to install libraries, headers > > applications, kernel modules and sdk files to a file system tree. > > This patch set allows to install files based on the next > > proposal: > > http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy.html > > I'm not sure what this patch holds, given the following proposal: > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-November/027777.html > > -Aaron >