From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:22:26 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 04/21 RFC] core/legal-info: allow ignoring packages from the legal-info In-Reply-To: <5d993adab02ed57f67d14652247fbd31aaae87bc.1447713615.git.yann.morin.1998@free.fr> References: <5d993adab02ed57f67d14652247fbd31aaae87bc.1447713615.git.yann.morin.1998@free.fr> Message-ID: <20151117122226.0cbd8042@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Yann, Luca, On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 23:46:59 +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > It might be necessary to not even mention a package in the output of > legal-info: > > - virtual package have virtually nothing to save in the legal-info > output; > > - for Buildroot itself, host-gcc-initial and host-gcc-final are not > real packages, they are just two different steps of the same > package, gcc; > > - for proprietary packages, it might not even be legal to even mention > them, being under NDA or some other such restrictive conditions. > > Add the new 'IGNORE' keyword to the _REDISTRIBUTE package variable, so > that the legal-info infra will simply completely ignore that package. > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" > Cc: Luca Ceresoli I understand the idea, but I'm not a big fan of a boolean variable that is no longer a boolean variable. So, let me question the current handling of _REDISTRIBUTE = NO. Does it make sense to mention such packages in the legal-info output, since their source code is not saved anyway? Shouldn't we simply change the behavior of _REDISTRIBUTE = NO to be that such packages are not listed at all in the legal-info output, which would match what you're looking for for with this "IGNORE" thing ? Luca, do you see any drawback in completely omitting REDISTRIBUTE = NO packages from legal-info ? Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com