From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/16] pkg: add recipe for RPM Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 13:11:26 +0200 Message-ID: <533BF05E.9000904@redhat.com> References: <1391529271-24606-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <1391529271-24606-4-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <20140224165208.GF27503@x220.localdomain> <4232273.mks7Rollq1@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: Thomas Monjalon , Chris Wright Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4232273.mks7Rollq1@xps13> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On 04/02/2014 11:01 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hello, > > Sorry for the long delay. > > 2014-02-24 08:52, Chris Wright: >>> pkg/rpm.spec | 143 >> >> This should be dpdk.spec > > Actually it should be dpdk-core.spec. > Since it is a file hosted in the project, is it mandatory to have such naming? > Could you explain why? > When building it with "rpmbuild -ta dpdk.tar.gz", the .spec name has no > importance. You are right, it doesn't matter for external building but this would likely get pointed at in the Fedora package review process. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Spec_file_name