Hi Thomas,
> This patch introduce RTE_VER_PATCH_RELEASE so #ifdef RTE_VER_PATCH_RELEASE is
> always true. I don't see why a commercial version of the DPDK would like to
> apply part of this patch.
ok this was just a comment in case of.
17/05/2013 11:12, Olivier MATZ :
> > @@ -75,7 +87,8 @@ rte_version(void) {
> >
> > return RTE_VER_PREFIX" "
> >
> > RTE_STR(RTE_VER_MAJOR)"."
> > RTE_STR(RTE_VER_MINOR)"."
> >
> > - RTE_STR(RTE_VER_PATCH_LEVEL);
> > +
Hi Thomas,
> @@ -75,7 +87,8 @@ rte_version(void) {
> return RTE_VER_PREFIX" "
> RTE_STR(RTE_VER_MAJOR)"."
> RTE_STR(RTE_VER_MINOR)"."
> - RTE_STR(RTE_VER_PATCH_LEVEL);
> + RTE_STR(RTE_VER_PATCH_LEVEL)"r"
> +
Applications can test versions, for compatibility, this way:
#if RTE_VERSION >= RTE_VERSION_NUM(1,2,3,4)
Previous versions can be tested with:
#ifndef RTE_VERSION_NUM
RTE_VERSION was already defined for use with rte_config.
It is moved in rte_version.h and updated to current versio
4 matches
Mail list logo