Why it is surprising that I need to compile DPDK on a system Busybox? I currently build DPDK both for my local Alpine Linux system (busybox) using the system compiler, use busybox for my cross-tools toolchain, and also use it in Libertine Linux. It means a system using DPDK can be much more minimal. Likewise, Aboriginal Linux uses Busybox (and, shortly, Toybox), for similar reasons. It also means users of my rust crate can work in a wider range of systems than RHEL / Ubuntu.
On 14 March 2017 at 09:39, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monja...@6wind.com> wrote: > 2017-03-14 07:58, Raphael Cohn: > > Hi, > > > > To compile DPDK on a system with Busybox tar installed, it's necessary to > > make a small change to the build system:- > > > > sed -i -e '/--keep-newer-files/d' mk/rte.sdkinstall.mk > > sed -i -e 's;--strip-components=1 \\;--strip-components=1;g' mk/ > > rte.sdkinstall.mk > > > > I'm not sure whether the impact of this change fundamentally affects > DPDK. > > I'm a little surprised that tar is needed at all for a compile + install, > > but I haven't investigated further. Is it being used to do a copy? > > Yes it is used to make a copy. > It is a convenient one-liner. > > I am a bit surprised that you need to install DPDK with busybox. > The busybox systems are generally cross-built and prepared out of the box, > with the host tools. > However, if you feel it is important to install DPDK on such target, > you are welcome to propose a patch. > >
