[PATCH] README: Add dependencies per Platform

[Colin Ian King]

On 31/01/18 17:45, Deb McLemore wrote:
> I'm not sure the history on why the distro specifics were not identified before, but the
> 
> thought was to add what we know today and what is useful and maintain going forward.
> 
> If arch is not deemed helpful, that can be removed.  I have insight for ppc64le, I'll need other
> 
> input on how best to format for coverage on the previous arch's/distro's.

I'd rather have some distro package info than none for sure.  Let's go
with what we have here and I'll try and figure out if there any
differences for other arches and I'll update the README as and when.

Colin

> 
> 
> On 01/31/2018 11:39 AM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>> On 1/31/2018 8:36 AM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>>> On 1/31/2018 6:51 AM, Deb McLemore wrote:
>>>> Add platform distro dependency specifics (per architecture).
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Deb McLemore <debmc at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   README | 13 ++++++++++++-
>>>>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/README b/README
>>>> index 521bd86..1c5951c 100644
>>>> --- a/README
>>>> +++ b/README
>>>> @@ -6,7 +6,18 @@ Quick Start Guide
>>>>   1) Dependencies:
>>>> -    autoconf, automake, libglib2.0-dev, libtool, libpcre3-dev, libjson0-dev | libjson-c-dev, flex, bison, dkms, libfdt-dev
>>>> +Ubuntu Distro x86_64
>>>> +    autoconf automake libglib2.0-dev libtool libpcre3-dev libjson0-dev
>>>> +    libjson-c-dev flex bison dkms libfdt-dev
>>>> +
>>>> +Ubuntu Distro ppc64el
>>>> +    autoconf automake libglib2.0-dev libtool libpcre3-dev libjson-c-dev
>>>> +    flex bison dkms libfdt-dev device-tree-compiler
>>>> +
>>>> +RHEL Distro ppc64el
>>>> +    autoconf automake kernel-devel libtool flex flex-devel bison dkms
>>>> +    libfdt libfdt-devel dtc json-c json-c-devel pcre-devel pcre2 pcre2-devel
>>>> +    pcre2-utf16 pcre2-utf32 glib2 glib2-devel pciutils pciutils-devel zlib-devel
>>>>   2) To build and install (only if building from source)
>>>>
>>>
>>> What about ARM64?
>>>
>>
>> Maybe a better question, what is the value in delineating by arch?
>>
>> Ok, I see powerPC needs the device tree compiler.  Why is that only needed for powerPC, and what is the argument against listing that for Ubuntu on all arches?
>>
>> I see the value of specifying a tailored list by distro, but adding an arch to the matrix seems like a massive amount of effort to generate and maintain the various variants, for little gain.
>>
> 
>