From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] standard make install
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 14:34:26 +0100
Message-ID: <1688604.3zH5RcAOuN@xps13>
References: <1449028676-19232-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
 <1449118929-19962-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
 <56604306.4080203@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>,
 Mario Carrillo <mario.alfredo.c.arevalo@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B14262E81
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  3 Dec 2015 14:35:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: by wmec201 with SMTP id c201so22412719wme.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 05:35:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <56604306.4080203@redhat.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2015-12-03 15:26, Panu Matilainen:
> On 12/03/2015 07:01 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > Following the recent discussions, this is a proposal to have a standard
> > installation process while keeping compatibility with most of the old
> > behaviours.
> >
> > v2 changes:
> > - fix default build dir
> > - RTE_TARGET subdir in $(sdkdir).
> > - better kerneldir defaults
> > - fix dpdk_nic_bind symlink
> > - always install doc if generated
> > - doc
> > - pkg/dpdk.spec
> >
> 
> Except for the minor nit about examples location (one could bikeshed on 
> things like these forever), seems fine to me and quick-n-dirty 
> conversion of my own spec didn't reveal any nasty surprises.
> 
> It also appears more comprehensive and integrated with other workflows 
> than the competing patches so FWIW, you have my ACK :)

Thank you.
I'm going to send a v3.
Mario, what is your opinion about this series?