Re: Compiling DPDK 17.02 with a Busybox-based tar

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>]

2017-03-14 14:20, Raphael Cohn:
> 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.

I understand the need for busybox on the target system.
I was just saying that generally we use a more complete system on the
host building a target. But you are free to use any tool you want :)

PS: please reply in-line


> On 14 March 2017 at 09:39, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@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.
> >
> >