Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] base: add ability to provide further details when using LICENSE_FLAGS

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] base: add ability to provide further details when using LICENSE_FLAGS

[Ross Burton]

Hi,

If this merges, this new variable should be covered in the section about using special licenses.

Ross


> On 24 May 2023, at 15:57, Ross Burton via lists.openembedded.org <ross.burton=arm.com@lists.openembedded.org> wrote:
> 
> From: Ross Burton <ross.burton@arm.com>
> 
> Recipes with proprietary licenses often need to use LICENSE_FLAGS so
> that the user can opt-in with consent. However, if you don't consent
> then the error simply tells you the license identifier but not further
> context.
> 
> Add a new variable LICENSE_FLAGS_DETAILS, which will be looked in for a
> flag with the name of the licence.  If found then the contents are
> printed as a source of further details.
> 
> For example, a recipe with an EULA may set:
> 
>  LICENSE_FLAGS = "FooBar-EULA"
>  LICENSE_FLAGS_DETAILS[FooBar-EULA] = "https://example.com/eula"
> 
> If Foobar-EULA isn't in LICENSE_FLAGS_ACCEPTED then the error message is
> more useful:
> 
>  Has a restricted license 'FooBar-EULA' which is not listed in your
>  LICENSE_FLAGS_ACCEPTED. For further details, see
>  https://example.com/eula.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@arm.com>
> ---
> meta/classes-global/base.bbclass | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/classes-global/base.bbclass b/meta/classes-global/base.bbclass
> index b6e339ed9c5..976a2ddee4b 100644
> --- a/meta/classes-global/base.bbclass
> +++ b/meta/classes-global/base.bbclass
> @@ -516,12 +516,12 @@ python () {
>         check_license_format(d)
>         unmatched_license_flags = check_license_flags(d)
>         if unmatched_license_flags:
> -            if len(unmatched_license_flags) == 1:
> -                message = "because it has a restricted license '{0}'. Which is not listed in LICENSE_FLAGS_ACCEPTED".format(unmatched_license_flags[0])
> -            else:
> -                message = "because it has restricted licenses {0}. Which are not listed in LICENSE_FLAGS_ACCEPTED".format(
> -                    ", ".join("'{0}'".format(f) for f in unmatched_license_flags))
> -            bb.debug(1, "Skipping %s %s" % (pn, message))
> +            for unmatched in unmatched_license_flags:
> +                message = "Has a restricted license '%s' which is not listed in your LICENSE_FLAGS_ACCEPTED." % unmatched
> +                details = d.getVarFlag("LICENSE_FLAGS_DETAILS", unmatched)
> +                if details:
> +                    message += " For further details, see %s." % details
> +            bb.debug(1, "Skipping %s: %s" % (pn, message))
>             raise bb.parse.SkipRecipe(message)
> 
>     # If we're building a target package we need to use fakeroot (pseudo)
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 
> 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#181677): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/181677
> Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/99110379/6875888
> Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [ross.burton@arm.com]
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] base: add ability to provide further details when using LICENSE_FLAGS

[Richard Purdie]

On Wed, 2023-05-24 at 14:58 +0000, Ross Burton wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> If this merges, this new variable should be covered in the section about using special licenses.

Shouldn't there be a documentation patch here? ;-)

Cheers,

Richard