Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] xz: Remove GPLv3 license checksum
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 13:27:05 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5fc12556-a817-e312-e1ed-60878a97d78c@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190827180449.GA29638@localhost>

On 8/27/19 1:04 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 01:50:14PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:46 PM Wes Lindauer <wesley.lindauer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Although xz has some files that are GPLv3 licensed, none of them get
>>> packaged up, and therefore none of it ends up in the final rootfs. Since
>>> there is no GPLv3 code in the final image, we don't want to include it
>>> when we collect licenses, as that would give the incorrect impression
>>> that the image contains GPLv3 code.
>>
>> We will be distributing this in src packages though. Maybe these files
>> should be deleted before the build even starts.
> 
> OE does licence tracking on binary packages, not on source packages.

It tracks -both-.  Since MOST recipes and binary packages agree, people don't
often know this.

LICENSE is the -recipe source license-.  Nothing more nothing less.  It
typically does NOT include the license of things used to build the software
(such as makefiles, autoconf fragments, etc), but must include the license of
any sources that are or may be used to construct binaries.

LICENSE_<package> is automatically defined as LICENSE.  If a binary package has
a difference license (which must ALWAYS be a subset of the recipe LICENSE), then
it can be specified independently.

See sysfsutils as an example:

LICENSE = "GPLv2 & LGPLv2.1"
LICENSE_${PN} = "GPLv2"
LICENSE_libsysfs = "LGPLv2.1"

recipe is made of of source code consisting of GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1.

The LICENSE_${PN} is expected to be GPLv2, while the LICENSE_libsysfs is
expected to be LGPLv2.1.


The LIC_FILES_CHKSUM is supposed to represent the -recipe- source license.  If
the component is used to build the binaries, then it needs to be listed (but
only has to be listed once).

If the component MIGHT be used, it needs to be listed.

If the component will NOT be used, then it should not be listed (and it's
advised to remove it from the source to avoid accidental usage...)

--Mark


> There are recipes that build binary packages with different licences 
> from the same sources.
> 
> cu
> Adrian
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-27 18:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-16 19:44 [PATCH 1/6] iw: Fix license field to BSD-2-Clause Wes Lindauer
2019-08-16 19:44 ` [PATCH 2/6] openssh: Update LICENSE field with missing values Wes Lindauer
2019-08-16 19:44 ` [PATCH 3/6] shadow: Fix BSD license file checksum Wes Lindauer
2019-08-16 19:44 ` [PATCH 4/6] sudo: " Wes Lindauer
2019-08-16 19:44 ` [PATCH 5/6] libunwind: Fix MIT " Wes Lindauer
2019-08-16 19:44 ` [PATCH 6/6] xz: Remove GPLv3 license checksum Wes Lindauer
2019-08-16 20:50   ` Khem Raj
2019-08-27 17:34     ` Wes Lindauer
2019-08-27 18:04     ` Adrian Bunk
2019-08-27 18:27       ` Mark Hatle [this message]
2019-09-03 18:59         ` Wes Lindauer
2019-09-04 12:07           ` Mark Hatle
2019-09-04 18:50             ` Richard Purdie
2019-09-04 19:53               ` Adrian Bunk
2019-09-04 20:18                 ` Mark Hatle
2019-09-04 20:30                   ` Mark Hatle
2019-09-04 20:36                   ` richard.purdie
2019-09-05  9:35                 ` Peter Kjellerstedt
2019-09-04 20:27             ` Adrian Bunk
2019-09-04 20:42               ` Mark Hatle
2019-09-05  5:40                 ` Adrian Bunk
2019-08-16 20:02 ` ✗ patchtest: failure for "iw: Fix license field to BSD-2..." and 5 more Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5fc12556-a817-e312-e1ed-60878a97d78c@windriver.com \
    --to=mark.hatle@windriver.com \
    --cc=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=raj.khem@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox