Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] util-linux: Improve the package licenses

[Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>]

Hi Peter,

On 6/3/25 5:14 AM, Peter Kjellerstedt via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> The default license for util-linux is GPL-2.0-or-later.
> 
> Most of the applications and the libraries are also linked with
> libcommon.la, which uses these licenses:
> LGPL-2.1-or-later & BSD-2-Clause & BSD-3-Clause & MIT
> 
> Set the above licenses for all dynamic packages, unless explicitly
> specified.
> 
> In particular, this avoids setting BSD-4-Clause-UC and EUPL-1.2 on
> packages where they do not belong.
> 
> License-Update: See above
> Signed-off-by: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>
> ---
>   meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc   | 41 ++++++++++++++++---
>   .../util-linux/util-linux_2.41.bb             |  3 ++
>   2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc b/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc
> index b0f2a9d497..bd7ad10035 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc
> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/util-linux/util-linux.inc
> @@ -6,14 +6,43 @@ disk partitioning, kernel message management, filesystem creation, and system lo
>   
>   SECTION = "base"
>   
> +# Most of the applications and the libraries are linked with libcommon.la,
> +# which uses these licenses

Is this something we can detect directly within the binaries in a 
package, so that we could simply add those licenses dynamically to 
LICENSE:${PN}-x instead of having to list them by hand?

Packages without a package-specific LICENSE will take the recipe's 
LICENSE I believe, considering that *.la is part of the -dev package 
should the -dev package have a "more precise" license than the recipe's 
default?

Cheers,
Quentin