From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] mk: add sensible default target with defconfig Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 11:36:22 +0200 Message-ID: <2651056.W04Ra9JkEP@xps> References: <1495788764-37652-2-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <2019184.UUXt4e9AVR@xps> <3F5BA2D9419A984DBB40DB5CFACBB36D1F9D8F2F@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "shreyansh.jain@nxp.com" To: "Hunt, David" Return-path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D224378B for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2017 11:36:31 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <3F5BA2D9419A984DBB40DB5CFACBB36D1F9D8F2F@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 04/08/2017 10:22, Hunt, David: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@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 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 > > Acked-by: Shreyansh Jain > > 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?