From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com (mailout4.zoneedit.com [64.68.198.17]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C088606D0 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:36:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02F1320901; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:36:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmo03-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E2Lk2s64d3u2; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:36:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gandalf.denix.org (pool-100-15-106-107.washdc.fios.verizon.net [100.15.106.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C88EF208EE; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:36:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gandalf.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 17EC0162177; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:36:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:36:53 -0400 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: Paul Eggleton Message-ID: <20161021143653.GC2494@denix.org> References: <1476871513-19739-1-git-send-email-o.mandel@menlosystems.com> <1985222.nRgBkrL9KW@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1985222.nRgBkrL9KW@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org, Olaf Mandel Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] $COREBASE/LICENSE in LIC_FILES_CHKSUM X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:36:56 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:29:55PM +1300, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Hi Olaf, > > On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:05:12 Olaf Mandel wrote: > > I ran into QA issues when inadvertently replacing OEs LICENSE with > > Yoctos LICENSE file. Why should recipes depend on the license for > > the complete collection of layers? At least for "normal" recipes > > that generate target device packages, this makes no sense to me. > > > > I patched out the global LICENSE file from all those recipes that > > are short enough and where I feel reasonably confident of not > > having actually changed the claimed license terms in any way. > > Agreed, doing this cleanup makes sense to me. We should especially discourage > others from referring to this file in their own recipes, and we start by > showing a good example. FWIW, we also discussed this topic at OEDEM last week... > > There are additional recipes that reference the global LICENSE > > file, but where I am not sure if a less blanket license declaration > > is appropriate or not. Especially for meta-toolchain and > > build-appliance-image, the global LICENSE is probably correct. > > Any comments? > > For images and other recipes that don't pull in anything by themselves, there > shouldn't be a need for LIC_FILES_CHKSUM (or indeed LICENSE) to be set at all > - in order to understand the license for the result the appropriate place to > look is the license manifest that represents everything that goes into the > image. In fact, in master / morty, if SRC_URI is empty then LIC_FILES_CHKSUM > is no longer verified [1]. Thus, for such recipes we can remove the setting of > LIC_FILES_CHKSUM (and LICENSE, if possible) altogether. > > Cheers, > Paul > > [1] http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=c269547ae8e90a78349f6003385137e4145e145f > > -- > > Paul Eggleton > Intel Open Source Technology Centre > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core