Re: [PATCH 1/7] license.bbclass: Introduce AVAILABLE_LICENSES that lists all licenses

[Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@streamunlimited.com>
> Sent: den 9 december 2019 10:41
> To: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>
> Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/7] license.bbclass: Introduce
> AVAILABLE_LICENSES that lists all licenses
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Sat, Dec 07, 2019 at 06:38:09AM +0100, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:
> > Previously, there was SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES, an undocumented
> > variable that contained a static list of licenses. It was used by
> > expand_wildcard_licenses() to expand any wildcards used in, e.g.,
> > INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE. However, since this static list of licenses has
> > not been kept up-to-date, many licenses were missing, with the result
> > that if one tried to use any of those licenses with a wildcard, no
> > licenses would be found, effectively ignoring that they should be
> > marked as incompatible.
> >
> > This introduces a new (documented) variable, AVAILABLE_LICENSES, that
> > is automatically updated to contain all licenses found in any
> > directories specified by ${COMMON_LICENSE_DIR} and ${LICENSE_PATH},
> > and uses it instead of SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES when expanding
> > wildcards.
> >
> 
> Great addition, thanks!
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>
> > ---
> >  meta/classes/license.bbclass                  | 27 ++++++++++++++++---
> >  meta/conf/documentation.conf                  |  1 +
> >  .../oeqa/selftest/cases/incompatible_lic.py   |  6 ++---
> >  3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/classes/license.bbclass b/meta/classes/license.bbclass
> > index 648a4d7892..20af6d34b6 100644
> > --- a/meta/classes/license.bbclass
> > +++ b/meta/classes/license.bbclass
> > @@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ def canonical_license(d, license):
> >      """
> >      Return the canonical (SPDX) form of the license if available (so GPLv3
> >      becomes GPL-3.0), for the license named 'X+', return canonical form of
> > -    'X' if availabel and the tailing '+' (so GPLv3+ becomes GPL-3.0+),
> > +    'X' if availabel and the tailing '+' (so GPLv3+ becomes GPL-3.0+),
> 
> Might not be fully awake yet but looks like it's a spurious change here.

There was a trailing space on that line that I removed.

> Though, there's actually a typo in availabel that could be fixed :)

Now that you mention it, there actually is. Might as well fix that 
too now that it has been discovered.

> [...]
> >
> >      # Verify that a package with a non-SPDX license (neither in
> > -    # SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES nor in SPDXLICENSEMAP) cannot be built when
> > +    # AVAILABLE_LICENSES nor in SPDXLICENSEMAP) cannot be built when
> >      # INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE contains this license
> >      def test_incompatible_nonspdx_license(self):
> >          self.lic_test('incompatible-nonspdx-license', 'FooLicense', 'FooLicense')
> > --
> 
> I think it could be great to have a new test in that selftest file to
> check that INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE works with wildcards for licenses not in
> SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES.

Well, I remove SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES in the next commit so I do not 
see what that would add?

> Thanks,
> Quentin

//Peter