Re: [PATCH 4/8] Add copyleft compliance class --- MAJOR BREAKAGE!!!!

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 03:21 +0100, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
> On 2011-12-07 22:53, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On (07/12/11 11:34), Beth Flanagan wrote:
> >> From: Christopher Larson<kergoth@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> Deploys sources for recipes for compliance with copyleft-style licenses
> >> Defaults to using symlinks, as it's a quick operation, and one can easily
> >> follow the links when making use of the files (e.g. tar with the -h arg).
> >>
> >> By default, includes all GPL and LGPL, and excludes CLOSED and Proprietary.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christopher Larson<kergoth@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>   meta/classes/copyleft_compliance.bbclass |   94 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>   1 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>   create mode 100644 meta/classes/copyleft_compliance.bbclass
> >>
> >> diff --git a/meta/classes/copyleft_compliance.bbclass b/meta/classes/copyleft_compliance.bbclass
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 0000000..5d9ab11
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/meta/classes/copyleft_compliance.bbclass
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
> >> +# Deploy sources for recipes for compliance with copyleft-style licenses
> >> +# Defaults to using symlinks, as it's a quick operation, and one can easily
> >> +# follow the links when making use of the files (e.g. tar with the -h arg).
> >> +#
> >> +# By default, includes all GPL and LGPL, and excludes CLOSED and Proprietary.
> >> +#
> >> +# vi:sts=4:sw=4:et
> >> +
> >> +COPYLEFT_SOURCES_DIR ?= '${DEPLOY_DIR}/copyleft_sources'
> >> +
> >> +COPYLEFT_LICENSE_INCLUDE ?= 'GPL* LGPL*'
> >> +COPYLEFT_LICENSE_INCLUDE[type] = 'list'
> >> +COPYLEFT_LICENSE_INCLUDE[doc] = 'Space separated list of globs which include licenses'
> If the Ampersand is not accepted in the LICENSE string, then the recipes 
> below are broken.
> 
>  From my latest build, at least recipes with "&&" fail...
> This means that nothing really completes that I have tested.
> 
> MAJOR BREAKAGE!!!!
> 
> I think it would be better FIRST to fix the recipes, and then introduce 
> checking.

I think the single ampersand is accepted, the double might no longer be.
Certainly oe-core does continue to work. I hadn't realised there were
incompatibilities introduced by this patch :(

Not sure what we should do about this at this point, probably fix the
layers :/.

Cheers,

Richard