04/08/2017 11:53, Hunt, David:

On 4/8/2017 10:36 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

quoted

04/08/2017 10:22, Hunt, David:

quoted

From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
07/06/2017 16:37, David Hunt:

quoted

Users can now use 'make defconfig' to generate a configuration using
the most appropriate defaults for the current machine.

<arch-machine-execenv-toolchain>
   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 <redacted>
Acked-by: Shreyansh Jain <redacted>

Looks to be a good idea if it is really automatic.

quoted

+                ${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?

quoted

-	@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?

OK, I would be OK with the first patch. However, I think the 
RTE_CONFIG_TEMPLATE comment part of the patch is fine, we just tested it 
here. It's only RTE_TEMPLATE I'm introducing in the second patch, nor 
RTE_CONFIG_TEMPLATE. That existed before this patch set. So the echo 
command in the first patch works fine, and shows the user what template 
the script has used to configure itself.

Ah OK I totally missed it :)

I could upload another patch with just the first patch (and the relevant 
2 lines from the docs patch) as a v4?

Yes perfect