Apologies for the tardy reply. I like where you're going, usually I have to disagree to reply swiftly. Sorry.
On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 17:00 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Hi all, > > As part of the 1.1 feature list I suggested a review of the > INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE and COMMERCIAL* package exclusion mechanisms we have > within Poky. Below I've outlined my ideas and would appreciate any > comments/additions/corrections. > > ==== Aims ==== > > * Make error messages clear when user/dependencies have asked for something > to be built that can't be due to restrictions > > * Ensure that exclusion system is reliable Solid. > > ==== Proposed implementation ==== > > 1) Ensure all documentation of LICENSE field value syntax is clear, concise > and up-to-date (wiki and manual) > > 2) Go through and audit all recipes LICENSE field values to ensure that they > all conform to the specifications. This includes making sure that | (package > may be used under one of a selection of licences) and & (recipe has mixed > licences that apply to the code base, so conditions of all must be observed) > are used correctly. > > 3) bitbake/core changes: > > * LICENSE field checking must fully parse the field and understand the > difference between | and &, and must not e.g. mark Qt as being GPLv3 only. > > * Make the LICENSE validity checking more strict (given recipes have been > audited and rules are clear after above) > > * Don't exclude any recipes at parse time - simply record all excluded > recipes and their runtime provides in a blacklist which also includes flags > indicating the reason for blacklisting > > * Ensure all excluded licences in INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE are valid (e.g. catch > GPL3 as apposed to GPLv3) - if not, error out > > * Check when calculating dependencies if anything is scheduled to be built > that is on the blacklist - if any are, gather all of them up and then stop > and > list them in an error message along with reason and depchain for each one This sounds like overlap with a task Scott Garman is set to work on (Error handling in bitbake), let's make sure you guys are collaborating here. http://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=542 > > * Check when constructing the rootfs if anything in the runtime provides > blacklist is going to be included - if so, error out > > > Some further possible extensions: > > * Possibly apply similar logic to COMPATIBLE_MACHINE? > > * Replace COMMERCIAL* with some more generic exclusion mechanism that allows > the reason to be defined as part of the exclusion list? Sounds reasonable, care to elaborate? Something like: COMMERCIAL_LICENSE = "naughty packages from copyright hell" PERL_PACKAGES = "packages I don't want to include because I dislike Perl" EXCLUDED_PATTERNS = "PERL_PACKAGES COMMERCIAL_LICENSE" ?? > > * As a helper for non-en_US users, fail on parse if user defines any of the > *LICENSE* variables as *LICENCE*? (we definitely don't want the build to > continue and just ignore this as the user might not realise what has happened) Darn tootin! Looks like a good start, thanks Paul! Cheers, Joshua -- Joshua Lock Yocto Build System Monkey Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
