Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in separate recipe to allow bootstrapping

Peter Kjellerstedt
2021-03-26T18:06:42Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> Sent: den 25 mars 2021 17:52
> To: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>; Oleksiy Obitotskyi -
> X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) <oobitots@cisco.com>; Luca Bocassi
> <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> Cc: bluelightning@bluelightning.org; Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in separate
> recipe to allow bootstrapping
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 16:19 +0000, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > Sent: den 25 mars 2021 15:27
> > > To: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>; Oleksiy
> Obitotskyi -
> > > X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) <oobitots@cisco.com>; Luca
> Bocassi
> > > <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > > Cc: bluelightning@bluelightning.org; Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in separate
> > > recipe to allow bootstrapping
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 14:22 +0000, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > > > Sent: den 25 mars 2021 10:34
> > > > > To: Oleksiy Obitotskyi -X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco)
> > > > > <oobitots@cisco.com>; Luca Bocassi <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>;
> > > > > openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > > > > Cc: bluelightning@bluelightning.org; Peter Kjellerstedt
> > > > > <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>; Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in
> separate
> > > > > recipe to allow bootstrapping
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 09:17 +0000, Oleksiy Obitotskyi -X (oobitots
> -
> > > > > GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) wrote:
> > > > > > Could you look into this warning.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WARNING: util-linux-2.36.2-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: util-
> linux-
> > > dev
> > > > > rdepends on util-linux-libuuid-dev, but it isn't a build
> dependency?
> > > > > [build-deps]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/61/builds/3226
> > > > >
> > > > > That failure was my fault when testing some fixes.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've sent out a patch which renames util-linux-uuid to util-linux-
> > > libuuid
> > > > > and sorts out the license issue Peter reported.
> > > >
> > > > I don't mind the recipe being renamed and cleaned up, but I would
> prefer
> > > > to see my entire patch for the license parts being either integrated
> > > before
> > > > this or squashed into it, whichever you prefer. It does not make
> sense
> > > to
> > > > use the same LIC_FILES_CHKSUM for util-linux-libuuid as for util-
> linux,
> > > > and setting the other LICENSE variables in util-linux.inc no longer
> > > makes
> > > > sense as they are only relevant for util-linux.
> > >
> > > I'm torn on that. Code with the other licenses is present, just not
> used
> > > in the final output and I personally suspect that having one
> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM
> > > is going to be easier to maintain in the future rather than two
> separate
> > > ones.
> >
> > I actually checked all the files that go into -dev and -src before
> suggesting
> > this change, and all files are either marked as public domain or use a
> > BSD-3-Clause license.
>
> There is a difference between what ends up in ${S} and what ends up in the
> binary packages. LICENSE clearly governs the latter. Its the scope of
> LIC_FILES_CHECKSUM which there are differences of opinion on.

Well, the latter governs what ends up in ${PN}-lic, so having a lot of
unrelated (to the installed packages) license files in LIC_FILES_CHECKSUM
does not make sense (to me). If everything that is built and (possibly)
installed and thus distributed is covered by BSD-3-Clause licenses, why
should ${PN}-lic include a lot of license files for unrelated code?

> Cheers,
>
> Richard

//Peter