This iteration looks good to me and is understandable.
I think we may have to circle back for a followup branch on whether DPDK type fields imply a different package name (like whether we need to additionally install openvswitch-switch-dpdk).
But, I think we can address that in a followup when we get more information.
+1 for now.
This iteration looks good to me and is understandable.
I think we may have to circle back for a followup branch on whether DPDK type fields imply a different package name (like whether we need to additionally install openvswitch- switch- dpdk).
But, I think we can address that in a followup when we get more information.
+1 for now.