Hello,
Sorry for the long delay.
2014-02-24 08:52, Chris Wright:
> > pkg/rpm.spec | 143
>
> This should be dpdk.spec
Actually it should be dpdk-core.spec.
Since it is a file hosted in the project, is it mandatory to have such naming?
Could you explain why?
When building it with "rpmbuild -ta dpdk.tar.gz", the .spec name has no
importance.
> > +ExclusiveArch: i686, x86_64
> > +%define target %{_arch}-default-linuxapp-gcc
>
> What is this for?
Multi-targets builds are supported in DPDK Makefiles. So the target must be
explicited when building.
Is it OK to define such variable here?
> > +%description
> > +Dummy main package. Make only subpackages.
>
> I think the core package should have the .so, the -devel package w/
> headers, and no -static package. Including a .a file is discouraged in
> Fedora
OK
> > +%package core-runtime
>
> perhaps just 'runtime'
[...]
> > +%package core-devel
>
> name this devel
No, dpdk-core is a name to differentiate the main component and the extensions
such as dpdk-memnic.
So we should have dpdk-core and dpdk-core-devel. Do you agree?
> > +# debuginfo packaging is broken
> > +%define debug_package %{nil}
>
> Can you add a better comment why it's broken?
Yes, I think it's due to direct use of ld linker.
> > +make O=%{target} T=%{target} config
>
> Did you try to update the build system to output into $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> directly? It's much preferred compared to the cp/rmdir below
Probably we could change the build system but it should be another patch.
> > +%install
> > +rm -rf %{buildroot}
> > +make O=%{target} DESTDIR=%{destdir}
>
> Why make again (IOW, why not in %build section)?
This one is for installing files only. Isn't it the role of %install?
> > +mv %{destdir}/%{target}/kmod/*.ko %{buildroot}%{moddir}
>
> Normally I'd use install command (-d will create directories)
Yes but here the strategy is to dispatch some files and keep the remaining
ones in %{datadir}.
Thanks for the review
--
Thomas
