From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B7B88D93 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:29:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C72B314151; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 06:29:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp195.koti.laiskiainen.org (vpn1-6-117.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.6.117]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t8M6TUON013626; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 02:29:30 -0400 To: Mario Carrillo , dev@dpdk.org References: <1442608390-12537-1-git-send-email-mario.alfredo.c.arevalo@intel.com> From: Panu Matilainen Message-ID: <5600F549.20000@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 09:29:29 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1442608390-12537-1-git-send-email-mario.alfredo.c.arevalo@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.24 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] Add hierarchical support to make install 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, 22 Sep 2015 06:29:32 -0000 On 09/18/2015 11:33 PM, Mario Carrillo wrote: > DPDK package lacks of a mechanism to install libraries, headers > applications and kernel modules to a file system tree. > > This patch set allows to install files according to the next > proposal: > http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy.html > > By adding a parameter H=1 (hierarchy-file) to makefile system, it is > possible to do the next steps > > make config T=TARGET > make > make install H=1 > > and files will be installed on the proper directory. Also you can use > the DESTDIR variable. Thanks for working on this! My 5c is that I'd rather see "make install" do the right thing (as in, behave like a normal OSS project) by default instead of requiring some obscure additional parameter (which almost nobody will then find) to activate it. - Panu -