> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 03:48:01PM +0000, Stokes, Ian wrote: > > > >From: [email protected] > > > >[mailto:[email protected]] > > > >On Behalf Of Ian Stokes > > > >Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 1:57 PM > > > >To: [email protected] > > > >Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v1] docs: Use DPDK 16.11.2 stable release. > > > > > > > >Modify docs and travis linux build script to use the DPDK 16.11.2 > > > >stable branch to benefit from most recent bug fixes. > > > > > > > >Signed-off-by: Ian Stokes <[email protected]> > > > > > > One comment - I see references to 16.11 in $OVS_DIR/debian/changelog > > > and $OVS_DIR/rhel/openvswitch-fedora.spec.in. > > > > > > Although these weren't updated for 16.11.1, I wonder if they should > > > have been, and consequently updated here for 16.11.2? > > HI Mark, > > > > I'm not sure of those should be updated tbh, for debian it's under the > > header of > > > > openvswitch (2.7.0-1) unstable; urgency=low > > > > I think it should stay as 16.11 here as that's what was initially > supported for 2.7.0-1 I would guess. > > > > If a new section for 2.7.1 is added I guess we could add it there (Im > not sure though as we haven't done this before). > > debian/changelog is mostly a copy of NEWS. It's meant to explain what > features were added in a release. It doesn't make sense to update old > entries here, just as it doesn't make sense to update old entries in NEWS. > > > I'd be slow to update the reference in > > $OVS_DIR/rhel/openvswitch-fedora.spec.in as its > > > > BuildRequires: dpdk-devel >= 16.11 > > > > I would think the >= takes care of moving to the latest 16.11 available > for the distro? > > That's my understanding too.
Thanks for confirming these 2 points Ben, much appreciated. Ian _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
