On Wed, 2019-09-04 at 08:07 -0400, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 9/3/19 1:59 PM, Wes Lindauer wrote: > > Mark, > > > > In reference to "It typically does NOT include the license of > > things used to > > build the software (such as makefiles, autoconf fragments, etc)". > > Since the only file that is licensed under GPLv3 is a M4 macro, > > does that mean > > the current patch is still valid? Shouldn't the GPLv3 license be > > removed from > > this recipe? > > Unless the M4 file is generating/injecting code into the build(very > few I've > seen do this), then I would say it's not under GPLv3 at all. (And I > wouldn't > have included GPLv3 in the LICENSE statement.) > > But we need more consensus then just me saying so. > > This may be a good question for the OE-TSC to ensure that we have > clarification > on this issue, and it's not just me saying I think one way or > another.
Not sure it needs to go to the TSC, we just need a patch which clearly says why the LICENSE statement is incorrect. I don't think the original patch in the series was clear about why GPLv3 didn't apply but if the commit message is improved, its probably fine. Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
