From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 09:29:14 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Some legal-info observations/problems In-Reply-To: References: <20131002172307.0d6f02ea@skate> <524C4AD4.9040902@lucaceresoli.net> <524D9DE2.7090509@mind.be> <20131004110704.78f5b1a6@skate> <20131004173452.4f93d1c3@skate> <5253392E.8060000@mind.be> Message-ID: <20131009092914.6d9ba36c@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Simon Dawson, On Wed, 9 Oct 2013 08:23:27 +0100, Simon Dawson wrote: > > Ideally, such an external license should be downloaded already with 'make > > source'. Though that is perhaps stretching it a little... > > This can now be achieved by using Thomas P's new _EXTRA_DOWNLOADS > mechanism to download the license file(s); I wonder if that would be > an acceptable idiom in this situation...? Potential problems: * _EXTRA_DOWNLOADS downloads from the same _SITE that is used to download _SOURCE. So if your tarball and license files are not at the same location, it won't work. This could be fixed by having _EXTRA_DOWNLOADS use a full path rather than relying on _SITE. * _EXTRA_DOWNLOADS = foo will download the file as "foo" in the download directory. However, I do expect many of the license files that you would download this way to have relatively similar names: COPYING, LICENSE, Copyright, or something like that. And therefore, if two different packages have _EXTRA_DOWNLOADS = http://someplace/COPYING, the COPYING files would overwrite each other in the download directory. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com