LIC_FILES_CHKSUM fatal?

LIC_FILES_CHKSUM fatal?

[Phil Blundell]

This change, from commit d2d5456cd3b3bd3e52a5dedccca4d46e3a7986d1:

diff --git a/meta/classes/insane.bbclass b/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
index 225530a..71ed5b6 100644
--- a/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
+++ b/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
@@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ def package_qa_check_license(workdir, d):
         # just throw a warning now. Once licensing data in entered for enough of the recipes,
         # this will be converted into error and False will be returned.
         bb.error(pn + ": Recipe file does not have license file information (LIC_FILES_CHKSUM)")
-        return True
+        return False

means that, contrary to what the comment says, lack of LIC_FILES_CHKSUM
is now a fatal error.  Was this a deliberate change or an oversight? 

p.

Re: LIC_FILES_CHKSUM fatal?

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 17:24 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> This change, from commit d2d5456cd3b3bd3e52a5dedccca4d46e3a7986d1:
> 
> diff --git a/meta/classes/insane.bbclass b/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
> index 225530a..71ed5b6 100644
> --- a/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
> +++ b/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
> @@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ def package_qa_check_license(workdir, d):
>          # just throw a warning now. Once licensing data in entered for enough of the recipes,
>          # this will be converted into error and False will be returned.
>          bb.error(pn + ": Recipe file does not have license file information (LIC_FILES_CHKSUM)")
> -        return True
> +        return False
> 
> means that, contrary to what the comment says, lack of LIC_FILES_CHKSUM
> is now a fatal error.  Was this a deliberate change or an oversight? 
> 

It was a deliberate change, the comment was missed in the change though.

Yes, its annoying and we can have some way to turn it off but for at
least the core, having them present is a good thing.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: LIC_FILES_CHKSUM fatal?

[Gary Thomas]

On 05/16/2011 01:57 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 17:24 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
>> This change, from commit d2d5456cd3b3bd3e52a5dedccca4d46e3a7986d1:
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/classes/insane.bbclass b/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
>> index 225530a..71ed5b6 100644
>> --- a/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
>> +++ b/meta/classes/insane.bbclass
>> @@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ def package_qa_check_license(workdir, d):
>>           # just throw a warning now. Once licensing data in entered for enough of the recipes,
>>           # this will be converted into error and False will be returned.
>>           bb.error(pn + ": Recipe file does not have license file information (LIC_FILES_CHKSUM)")
>> -        return True
>> +        return False
>>
>> means that, contrary to what the comment says, lack of LIC_FILES_CHKSUM
>> is now a fatal error.  Was this a deliberate change or an oversight?
>>
>
> It was a deliberate change, the comment was missed in the change though.
>
> Yes, its annoying and we can have some way to turn it off but for at
> least the core, having them present is a good thing.

Even if this check doesn't treat this as fatal, my experience has
been that do_configure() fails if LIC_FILES_CHKSUM is missing.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------