On 11/07/2016 02:36 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:

On 7 November 2016 02:13:05 GMT+00:00, Thomas F Herbert therbert@redhat.com wrote:

Folks,

I have code to build DPDK RPM's built for 16.07 release merged
upstream in new dpdk-rpm project we started in fd.io. I also
modified the vpp rpm creation so it was more distro friendly, so
it could be built from a dist tarball or a SRPM.

My questions are about RPM naming conventions for Centos for DPDK,
vpp and other upstream NFV related projects to come.

I built RPMs previously for OVS/DPDK and DPDK in OPNFV and stuck
pretty to the Fedora naming conventions and nobody complained. But
somehow, I don't think that what I have done so far will meet the
more strict standards of the DISTRO.

To begin with, could you please point me to some guidelines for
file names. I see them for Fedora everywhere but I am fuzzy on
what would be required for Centos.

In order for the changelog to be meaningful it seems that there
should be a git hash tag appended to file name. however, when the
RPM is an unaltered "pure" upstream release with no patches I am
not sure this is necessary.

Forgive me if these seem like stupid questions but I am trying to
get a few bits together upstream and then I should be able to
start building in Koji for the NFV SIG and I want to make sure I
do things "right!"

--Tom


-- 
*Thomas F Herbert*
SDN Group
Office of Technology
*Red Hat*

Hi Thomas

We rely on the Fedora naming and packaging guidelines. If you are aligned with their specifications - you should be all set on our side too.

Please double check: Here is the built 16.07 dpdk RPM built in fd.io: https://nexus.fd.io/content/repositories/fd.io.master.centos7/io/fd/rpm_dpdk... I am not sure the ".0" should be there?

Regards

Sent on the move, excuse my typos