From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RlTxM-00088p-EJ for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:21:16 +0100 Received: from azsmga002.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.35]) by azsmga102.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2012 08:56:44 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="55866943" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.13.168]) ([10.255.13.168]) by AZSMGA002.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2012 08:56:44 -0800 Message-ID: <4F0F10CC.9030704@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:56:44 -0800 From: Saul Wold User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111115 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Zanussi References: <1d28eae1f497931d4a0a232a3390a9737a508aec.1325903501.git.tom.zanussi@intel.com> <4F07D3CA.4090807@linux.intel.com> <1325913187.15053.83.camel@elmorro> <4F0B7FF0.9060904@linux.intel.com> <1326154410.2413.22.camel@elmorro> In-Reply-To: <1326154410.2413.22.camel@elmorro> Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] base.bbclass: add support for LICENSE_FLAGS X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:21:16 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/09/2012 04:13 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote: > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 16:01 -0800, Saul Wold wrote: >> On 01/06/2012 09:13 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote: >>> On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 21:10 -0800, Saul Wold wrote: >>>> On 01/06/2012 06:34 PM, tom.zanussi@intel.com wrote: >>>>> From: Tom Zanussi >>>> >> With all the discussion about License related stuff on the list and IRC, >> I think we should be creating a bbclass to define and hold these flags. >> Then there is just a call from base.bbclass into check_license_flags >> and return True/False for the skip_package(). >> > > So move this code into a separate .bbclass, ok. > Move this code the license.bbclass or meta/lib/oe/licensee.py as appropriate. >> And based on a comment from Chris L. on the IRC, will this handle >> package level LICENSE_FLAGS, this is recipe level currently, correct? >> > > Right. > >> It could be you have some recipe with multiple binaries (for example) >> some are OK and some are not and they are packaged separately. Can the >> LICENSE_FLAGS handle this? >> > > No, I don't think so, there's just the per-recipe LICENSE_FLAGS. How > would that be expanded to per-package? > I verified with Richard, I thought we could do per-package, we can not currently, so LICENSE_FLAGS will be per-recipe now. Possibly change in the future would be per-package. Thanks for your work on this, I you have had to do some reworks, we are just trying to get it right. Sau! > Tom > >> Sau! >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Openembedded-core mailing list >>>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org >>>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Openembedded-core mailing list >>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org >>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >>> > > >