From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: Build DPDK with Google bazel Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 08:01:33 -0700 Message-ID: <20150526080133.7be30c9d@urahara> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Ming Zhao Return-path: Received: from mail-pd0-f175.google.com (mail-pd0-f175.google.com [209.85.192.175]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF1A29A9E for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:01:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: by pdbqa5 with SMTP id qa5so92709688pdb.0 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 08:01:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:53:27 -0700 Ming Zhao wrote: > bazel(http://bazel.io) is the open sourced version of Google build > tool, and it has proved itself is a nice solution for monolithic > server side development. In our company, we use both to build our > products and it greatly reduced the hurdle of rolling out any change > because we put the whole DPDK source code into tree and the build > process can easily produce final binaries at any point(i.e. we can put > a fix to DPDK code and the build process will always produce > up-to-date binary based on the change). > > We pushed all our changes to github in "bazel" > branch(https://github.com/mzhaom/dpdk/tree/bazel) in case any one > wants to try it. At the moment, due to the complexity of setting up > bazel BUILD files to handle different compilation settings, we are not > actively pursuing to integrate these changes back to upstream. But > I'll be happy to answer any question and provide help in case anyone > wants to do so. > > Thanks! Thanks for doing this, but please don't try and convert us. As an experience Unix/Linux person, new glitzy build systems are kind of a sore point. If you can make it work for you great, but let's keep the DPDK as simple as possible.