Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/localedef: add license data

["Alexis Lothoré via buildroot" <buildroot@buildroot.org>]

Hi Fiona,
my bad for the late reply, I have been OoO and got back today.

On Mon Jul 20, 2026 at 5:52 PM CEST, Fiona Klute wrote:
> Hi Alexis,
>
> thanks for the patch, I bumped into this recently, too!
>
> Am 15.07.26 um 14:30 schrieb Alexis Lothoré via buildroot:
>> When running `make legal-info` for a buil based on glibc and configured
>> to generate some locale data (eg: BR2_GENERATE_LOCALE="C.UTF-8"), the
>> following warning is printed:
>> 
>>    WARNING: localedef-2.43-45-gdae425b554207f7c4599c7fac707ad4c08545674: \
>>    cannot save license (HOST_LOCALEDEF_LICENSE_FILES not defined)
>> 
>> Define the missing LOCALEDEF_LICENSE and LOCALEDEF_LICENSE_FILES to get
>> rid of the warning. The header in locale/programs/localedef.c states
>> that the program is released under GPL, so use GPLv2, as also st stated
>> by glibc.mk in the glibc package in buildroot.
>
> You're obviously correct about locale/programs/localedef.c, but it 
> includes/links additional parts of glibc, and it's not obvious to me 
> which. Do you have a way to verify? And of course the source archive 
> includes everything anyway.
>
> glibc.mk currently lists:
>
> GLIBC_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+ (programs), LGPL-2.1+, BSD-3-Clause, MIT (library)
> GLIBC_LICENSE_FILES = COPYINGv2 COPYING.LESSERv2 LICENSES
>
> Side note: /usr/share/doc/libc-bin/copyright from the Debian libc-bin 
> package (which includes localedef) mentions that sysdeps/htl/raise.c is 
> licensed under LGPL-3.0+, which is not currently in our list. As far as 
> I understand it's only *used* on Hurd, but it's still present in the 
> source archive.

Yeah, my proposal may not be specific enough, considering the
internal dependencies pulled by localedef. The exact part pulled are not
clear for me neither, I've just been assuming that the main file being
GPL itself, we do not care about other dependencies, as GPL is stronger,
and so people building host-localedef in BR must consider GPL rights and
obligations when building it. But I may be wrong, any more educated view
on this is welcome.

I see that in the mean time you have sent a series updating glibc
licensing and mirroring it for localedef, I'm fine with it overriding
mine, if it is indeed the proper way of handling localedef licensing.

Thanks,

Alexis

>
> Best regards,
> Fiona
>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexis Lothoré <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com>
>> ---
>> Up to my knowledge this package never had the needed license data, so
>> all currently maintained versions are affected by the issue.
>> ---
>>   package/localedef/localedef.mk | 2 ++
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/package/localedef/localedef.mk b/package/localedef/localedef.mk
>> index 732ed6d4ad1d..aa7dba2b5170 100644
>> --- a/package/localedef/localedef.mk
>> +++ b/package/localedef/localedef.mk
>> @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ LOCALEDEF_VERSION = 2.43-45-gdae425b554207f7c4599c7fac707ad4c08545674
>>   LOCALEDEF_SOURCE = glibc-$(LOCALEDEF_VERSION)$(BR_FMT_VERSION_git).tar.gz
>>   LOCALEDEF_SITE = https://sourceware.org/git/glibc.git
>>   LOCALEDEF_SITE_METHOD = git
>> +LOCALEDEF_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+
>> +LOCALEDEF_LICENSE_FILES = COPYINGv2
>>   HOST_LOCALEDEF_DL_SUBDIR = glibc
>>   
>>   HOST_LOCALEDEF_DEPENDENCIES = \
>> 
>> ---
>> base-commit: 643f480f4379afe5677ec399c802b8d33734b601
>> change-id: 20260715-legal-info-localdef-cc9caf1a3f3a
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Alexis Lothoré <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> buildroot mailing list
>> buildroot@buildroot.org
>> https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot




-- 
Alexis Lothoré, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot