[Buildroot] [PATCH v3 02/22] gettext: warn that legal-info is not implemented

[Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>]

Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Luca Ceresoli<luca@lucaceresoli.net>  wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli<luca@lucaceresoli.net>
>> ---
>>   package/gettext/gettext.mk |    3 +++
>>   1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/package/gettext/gettext.mk b/package/gettext/gettext.mk
>> index f3605da..1d9d84d 100644
>> --- a/package/gettext/gettext.mk
>> +++ b/package/gettext/gettext.mk
>> @@ -113,6 +113,9 @@ $(STAGING_DIR)/$(GETTEXT_TARGET_BINARY): $(GETTEXT_DIR)/$(GETTEXT_BINARY)
>>                 autopoint envsubst gettext.sh gettextize msg* ?gettext)
>>         touch -c $@
>>
>> +gettext-legal-info:
>> +       @$(call legal-warning-pkg,gettext,cannot produce any legal info)
>> +
> I don't think this statement is not entirely correct. It's not that we
> 'cannot' produce the info. It's just that currently, we did not add
> the necessary license definitions, right?
> What about something like 'legal-info not yet implemented' or 'no
> legal info saved yet' or ...?
Yes, 'legal-info not yet implemented' is more understandable.
I'll change that.


> Moreover, will this be added to each package for which no legal info
> is provided? What about making this message the default by putting it
> in pkg-gentargets.mk, if no suitable variables were defined?

Gentargets packages without _LICENSE / _LICENSE_FILES defined are handled
automatically by gentargets. They get listed in the manifest this way:

$ cat legal-info/manifest.csv
package,version,license,license files,source archive
...
freetype,2.4.8,unknown,not saved,freetype-2.4.8.tar.bz2

The problem with non-gentargets packages is that they do not get listed
automatically in the manifest, because the manifest is produced by the
gentargets infrastrucure.

Hence we should:
  - convert these packages to gentargets, or
  - manually implement a<PKG>-legal-info for these packages, or
  - make the user aware that these packages are not handled by the legal-info
    stuff: no manifest entry, no tarball, no license files.

The first option is the best thing to do, but it's out of the scope of this
patchset. The number of manual packages is consistently approaching zero
anyway.

I don't like the second option: this is work that would mostly be wasted when
converting to gentargets. I would rather spend my time converting to
gentargets.
  
The third option is the warning you see.

Luca