Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] reserve 'make install' for future use

[Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>]

On 11/27/2015 07:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-11-25 10:48, Panu Matilainen:
>> On 11/24/2015 06:54 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 02:04:54PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>>> 2015-11-06 12:57, Bruce Richardson:
>>>>> 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?
>>>>
>>>> I plan to check these patches in the coming days for an integration in 2.2.
>>>>
>>> Anything further on this?
>>> Any thoughts from anyone else about this whole area of a saner build/install
>>> system for DPDK and the various patches floating around.
>>
>> Well, it seems we wont have a sane "make install" in 2.2 yet, but this
>> is at least a step in the right direction so +1 from me.
>
> Why is it a step in the right direction?

Right direction as in, everybody seems to agree we want "make install" 
ultimately do the right thing. If we can't have it in 2.2 yet then a 
preparatory step is better than not having it.

> We just need to install the files in a different hierarchy and adapt
> the makefiles to be able to compile an application while keeping the
> RTE_SDK variable to specify the root directory (previously built thanks
> to DESTDIR).
> As the hierarchy could be tuned, we need more variables, e.g.:
> 	DPDK_INC_DIR (default = RTE_SDK/include/dpdk)
> 	DPDK_LIB_DIR (default = RTE_SDK/lib)
>
> While doing it, we can have a specific handling of T= to keep compatibility
> with the current (old) syntax.
>
> What have I missed?

Perhaps its me who has missed the fact that 2.2 is still open for these 
kind of things.

If it were up to me, I think I'd just apply Marios latest patch series 
(perhaps condence it somewhat) to get it over with, fine-tune later 
if/as necessary. This is veering to the side of bikeshedding real fast.

BTW, one noteworthy point is that in all of these related threads, 
nobody absolutely nobody has spoken up for the current behavior of "make 
install". Which makes me wonder if anybody is actually using it, and 
whether all this is just worrying for nothing.

	- Panu -