> On Sep 12, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Neil Horman <nhor...@tuxdriver.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 01:26:09PM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote: >> >>> On Sep 12, 2017, at 8:24 AM, Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 02:21:22PM +0100, Wiles, Keith wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sep 12, 2017, at 5:37 AM, Bruce Richardson >>>>> <bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> V2 changes: >>>>> * fixed copyright notices, updated 2016 to 2017 >>>>> * removed dependency on kconfig file in kernel build tree >>>>> * marked pmdinfogen as a "native" binary, in preparation for future cross- >>>>> compilation work >>>>> * added in additional warning flags for compatibility with existing system >>>>> —— >>>> >>>> >>>>> Once reviewed and tested a bit, I hope to apply this set - or a new >>>>> revision of it - to the build-next tree, to serve as a baseline for others >>>>> to use and to add the missing functionality to. >>>> >>>> I would really like to see these patches in a build-next tree as it is >>>> much easier to work with and help with changes then patches on the master. >>>> >>>> When can we have a build-next tree created? >>>> >>> Tree already exists. I'm just waiting on a bit more review and ideally >>> an ack before I apply this set there. >> >> Not sure what you are waiting for as an ack is not going to make much of a >> difference IMO :-) >> > Why would an ACK not make any difference? Are you suggesting that using this > is > a forgone conclusion?
No, moving this patch to the dpdk-next-build repo is all I am saying. The patch and ack here is not for the master repo only the next-build repo and a pull request from the next-build repo still needs to be approved at some point for the master. > > Neil > >>> >>> http://dpdk.org/browse/draft/dpdk-next-build/ >>> >>> /Bruce >> >> Regards, >> Keith Regards, Keith
