[Buildroot] legal-info too permissive?

[Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>]

Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello Luca,
>
> Looking at
> http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/183/183d0af8c692b8c90b5b136999a0661fc7893b3a/build-end.log,
> one can see:
>
> cat: /home/test/test/2/output/build/neon-0.29.6/src/COPYING: No such file or directory
>
> so it seems like the neon legal informations are not correct (or no
> longer correct). This should be fixed of course, but the thing that
> surprises me here is that the 'make legal-info' apparently didn't
> return with an error. So the overall build was considered successful,
> even though some license information is obviously wrong in this neon
> package.
>
> In this intentional? Shouldn't 'make legal-info' be more restrictive,
> and bail out with an error if some license file cannot be found in the
> source code? At least the latter would be the most useful behavior for
> the autobuilders.

This is not intentional, it is a bug in the legal-info infrastructure.
Thanks for reporting!

The problem lies in the loopthat iterates over license files:

 >        @for F in $$($(2)_LICENSE_FILES); do \
 >                $(call 
legal-license-file,$$($(2)_RAWNAME),$$$${F},$$($(2)_DIR)/$$$${F}); \
 >                done

The loop errors out only if the last file is missing. If a preceding
file is missing, it goes on carelessly.

In the case of neon:
 > NEON_LICENSE_FILES = src/COPYING.LIB src/COPYING README
the missing file is the second out of three.

I am looking into fixing this.

Luca