04/08/2017 10:22, Hunt, David: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > 07/06/2017 16:37, David Hunt: > > Users can now use 'make defconfig' to generate a configuration using > > the most appropriate defaults for the current machine. > > > > <arch-machine-execenv-toolchain> > > arch taken from uname -m > > machine defaults to native > > execenv is taken from uname, Linux=linuxapp, otherwise bsdapp > > toolchain is taken from $CC -v to see which compiler to use > > > > Signed-off-by: David Hunt <david.h...@intel.com> > > Acked-by: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.j...@nxp.com> > > Looks to be a good idea if it is really automatic. > > > + ${CC} -v 2>&1 | \ > > + grep " version " | cut -d ' ' -f 1) > > Unfortunately, it depends on $CC which is not commonly exported. > What about defaulting to gcc? > > > - @echo "Configuration done" > > + @echo "Configuration done using "$(shell basename \ > > + $(RTE_CONFIG_TEMPLATE) | sed "s/defconfig_//g") > > RTE_CONFIG_TEMPLATE is not defined in this patch (and I do not see the > benefit in next patch). > > Thomas, > Does this mean that this patch is not going into this release? It has > been acked for almost a month now, with no further comment. The one hour > between your comment and the release of RC4 did not give me a reasonable > amount of time to address your concerns. I also feel that the lack of > comments in the last month should mean that the patch should be applied as > is. If changes are required, I am happy to address in the next release.
You're right, I'm very sorry not taking time to review it before. I think only the first patch should be integrated, without the comment for RTE_CONFIG_TEMPLATE. Opinion?
