On 2020-05-19 12:29 p.m., Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:
The jzlib license is a three clause BSD license, and so is the
go/LICENSE, so you should be able to set LICENSE as:
LICENSE = "bzip2-1.0.6 & GPLv3+ & Apache-2.0 & MS-PL & BSD-3-Clause & Zlib"
Peter,
I respectfully disagree.
The only source that is _executed_ in normal use by bzip2-test is
the run-tests.sh script that is licensed as GPLv3+
The other files, although they came from source packages,
are *only* used as test data. The source code has been completely
stripped out, hasn't it?
If, instead of compressed data,
someone were to give me an image file covered by a creative common's
license and the image had a watermark that when extracted produced
file with source code with a FOO license, would you change the
package license to include FOO? In fact, we don't even look at
image file licensing let alone at embedded watermarks.
I'm not a lawyer so this is simply my opinion on the matter.
How do we come to an agreement?
I'd be happy to add a comment in the recipe explaining our position:
# This package contains a script and test data this is derived from
# other software packages as explained in the top level README.
# Although there are COPYING files explaining the license terms
# for each sub-directory, the files in each directory are only used
# as test data so the LICENSING terms do not appear to apply to
# the recipe as we ship it and have therefore NOT been incorporated
# into the bzip2-ptests recipe licensing tags.
I can consult with some intellectual property experts that I know
about this particular case if you like.
../Randy
You also need to add:
LICENSE_${PN} = "bzip2-1.0.6"
LICENSE_${PN}-dev = "bzip2-1.0.6"
LICENSE_${PN}-dbg = "bzip2-1.0.6"
LICENSE_${PN}-doc = "bzip2-1.0.6"
LICENSE_${PN}-src = "bzip2-1.0.6"
LICENSE_libbz2 = "bzip2-1.0.6"
so the non-ptest packages are not affected by the licenses for the ptest
package.
//Peter
*From:*Rahul Kumar <[email protected]>
*Sent:* den 19 maj 2020 13:58
*To:* Peter Kjellerstedt <[email protected]>
*Cc:* Randy MacLeod <[email protected]>; Alexander Kanavin
<[email protected]>; Richard Purdie
<[email protected]>; OE-core
<[email protected]>; Trevor Gamblin
<[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2] bzip2: Add test suite for bzip2
Hi Peter,
I am sharing a few information related to bzip2-test source and
licensing information.
As per your suggestion and as per my understanding I added License to
the bzip2 recipe file.
bzip2-tests.git source tree structure is given below
(here showing licence related fle, removed other file names )
bzip2-tests.git/
├──commons-compress
│ ├──LICENSE.txt
│
├──dotnetzip
│ ├──License.txt
│ ├──License.zlib.txt
|
├──go
│ ├──LICENSE
│
├──lbzip2
├──pyflate
├──README
└── run-tests.sh
source code link:
https://sourceware.org/git/bzip2-tests.git
bzip2-tests.git source contains
1) comman-commpress: which is Originally distributed under the Apache
License Version 2.0.
See LICENSE.txt
2) dotnetzip:
(i) The DotNetZip Library is distributed under the MicroSoft Public License
(Ms-PL) see the License.txt file.
(ii) The BZ2 related resources are distributed under the licenses in
License.zlib.txt.
3) go:
Go is distributed under a BSD-style license.
See the LICENSE file.
4) lbzip2:
lbzip2 is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the
terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software
Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later
version
5) pyflate: You may use and distribute this code and documentation under any
DFSG-compatible license (eg. BSD, GNU GPLv2).
6) run-tests.sh: you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the
terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL); either
version 3, or (at your option) any later version.
SO in recipe I added the License like below
LICENSE = "bzip2-1.0.6 & GPLv3+ & Apache-2.0 & MS-PL & BSD "
LICENSE_${PN}-ptest = "GPLv3+ & Apache-2.0 & MS-PL & BSD"
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM =
"file://LICENSE;beginline=4;endline=37;md5=600af43c50f1fcb82e32f19b32df4664
\
file://${WORKDIR}/git/commons-compress/LICENSE.txt;md5=86d3f3a95c324c9479bd8986968f4327
\ # For comman-commpress (Apache-2.0)
file://${WORKDIR}/git/dotnetzip/License.txt;md5=9cb56871eed4e748c3bc7e8ff352a54f
\ # For dotnetzip (Ms-PL)
file://${WORKDIR}/git/dotnetzip/License.zlib.txt;md5=cc421ccd22eeb2e5db6b79e6de0a029f
\ # For dotnetzip (jzlib +zlib)
file://${WORKDIR}/git/go/LICENSE;md5=5d4950ecb7b26d2c5e4e7b4e0dd74707 \
# For go (BSD-style license)
here I need few suggestion:
1) I added the BSD and GPLv3+ license in LICENSE and LICENSE_${PN}-ptest.
but not added LIC_FILES_CHKSUM for GPLv3 and BSD because
bzip2-tests.git source code doesn't have GPLv3 and BSD License text file
like other
directories.
2) License.zlib.txt: This is a combination of two licence jzlib and
zlib. In meta/files/common-licenses Zlib license is available but not jzlib.
In this case how can I proceed?
Kindly comment on this and feel free to point out if i am wrong at any
place.
*Thanks & Regards,*
Rahul Kumar
Software Engineer,Linux Solutions Engineering
Group,Montavista Software LLC
Email Id: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<https://plus.google.com/+CodeTwoSoftware>
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 1:18 AM Peter Kjellerstedt
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
As I wrote in my previous mail, when it comes to licenses, it is the
distribution that is important. So if you build a package
(bzip2-ptest) that includes code that is GPL-3.0, it does not matter
if that code is only used as a binary blob, it is still distributed
in the package, and thus the package needs to be covered by the
GPL-3.0 license.
//Peter
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> *On Behalf Of
*Rahul Kumar
*Sent:* den 17 maj 2020 21:18
*To:* Randy MacLeod <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:* Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Richard Purdie
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; OE-core
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Trevor Gamblin
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Subject:* Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2] bzip2: Add test suite for bzip2
Hi Randy,
patch has been accepted by bzip2 community with additional changes.
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=bzip2-tests.git;a=commit;h=f9061c030a25de5b6829e1abf373057309c734c0
So I need your suggestion with respect to Yocto.
Since required changes for ptest infrastructure is integrated to the
bzip2-tests.git source code.
So now we can just change the SRCREV with the latest commit instead
of applying the patch to the bzip2-tests.git source code.
And since we are just integrating the bzip2-tests source to the
bzip2 recipe and not modifying any file so i think no need to add
any License for it.
Now patch will look like
=====================================================================
--- a/meta/recipes-extended/bzip2/bzip2/Makefile.am
+++ b/meta/recipes-extended/bzip2/bzip2/Makefile.am
@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ runtest:
else echo "FAIL: sample2 decompress"; fi
@if cmp sample3.tst sample3.ref; then echo "PASS: sample3
decompress";\
else echo "FAIL: sample3 decompress"; fi
+ ./bzip2-tests/run-tests.sh --tests-dir="$(PWD)/bzip2-tests"
install-ptest:
sed -n '/^runtest:/,/^install-ptest:/{/^install-ptest:/!p}' \
@@ -56,6 +57,7 @@ install-ptest:
cp $(srcdir)/sample1.bz2 $(DESTDIR)/
cp $(srcdir)/sample2.bz2 $(DESTDIR)/
cp $(srcdir)/sample3.bz2 $(DESTDIR)/
+ cp -rf $(srcdir)/../git $(DESTDIR)/bzip2-tests
ln -s $(bindir)/bzip2 $(DESTDIR)/bzip2
install-exec-hook:
diff --git a/meta/recipes-extended/bzip2/bzip2_1.0.8.bb
<http://bzip2_1.0.8.bb> b/meta/recipes-extended/bzip2/bzip2_1.0.8.bb
<http://bzip2_1.0.8.bb>
index d58f553..c5aa690 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-extended/bzip2/bzip2_1.0.8.bb <http://bzip2_1.0.8.bb>
+++ b/meta/recipes-extended/bzip2/bzip2_1.0.8.bb <http://bzip2_1.0.8.bb>
@@ -8,13 +8,17 @@ LICENSE = "bzip2-1.0.6"
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM =
"file://LICENSE;beginline=4;endline=37;md5=600af43c50f1fcb82e32f19b32df4664"
SRC_URI = "https://sourceware.org/pub/${BPN}/${BPN}-${PV}.tar.gz
<https://sourceware.org/pub/$%7bBPN%7d/$%7bBPN%7d-$%7bPV%7d.tar.gz> \
+
git://sourceware.org/git/bzip2-tests.git;name=bzip2-tests
<http://sourceware.org/git/bzip2-tests.git;name=bzip2-tests> \
file://configure.ac <http://configure.ac>;subdir=${BP} \
file://Makefile.am;subdir=${BP} \
file://run-ptest \
"
+
SRC_URI[md5sum] = "67e051268d0c475ea773822f7500d0e5"
SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
"ab5a03176ee106d3f0fa90e381da478ddae405918153cca248e682cd0c4a2269"
+SRCREV_bzip2-tests = "f9061c030a25de5b6829e1abf373057309c734c0" *<<
this commit Id includes latest charges for ptest infrastruct.*
+
UPSTREAM_CHECK_URI = "https://www.sourceware.org/pub/bzip2/";
PACKAGES =+ "libbz2"
@@ -39,7 +43,7 @@ do_install_ptest () {
FILES_libbz2 = "${libdir}/lib*${SOLIBS}"
-RDEPENDS_${PN}-ptest += "make"
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-ptest += "make bash"
PROVIDES_append_class-native = " bzip2-replacement-native"
BBCLASSEXTEND = "native nativesdk"
=================================================================================
Kindly comment on it and feel free to point out, if i am wrong at
any place.
*Thanks & Regards,*
Rahul Kumar
Software Engineer,Linux Solutions Engineering
Group,Montavista Software LLC
Email Id: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<https://plus.google.com/+CodeTwoSoftware>
On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 6:56 AM Randy MacLeod
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
On 2020-04-27 3:39 p.m., Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> You need to first see from the failure page which
configuration is
> failing, for example non-gpl3 is one such.
>
> Then you find that configuration in config.json. The below
should
> hopefully be self-explanatory in how you should set up the build?
>
> |"non-gpl3" : { "NEEDREPOS" : ["poky", "meta-gplv2"],
"MACHINE" :
> "qemux86", "BBTARGETS" : "core-image-minimal
core-image-full-cmdline",
> "extravars" : [ "INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE = '*GPLv3'",
"WARN_QA_remove =
> 'incompatible-license'" ], "EXTRACMDS" : [
> "../../yocto-autobuilder-helper/scripts/check-gplv3" ] },
>
> |
>
> |
> |
>
> |Alex
Hi Rahul,
Sorry for my late reply.
The commit log for v2 is very good now!
Thanks for incorporating my --pedantic suggestions. ;-)
It seems that you need a perl dependency for something (docs?
$ cd .../bzip2.git
$ grep -r "perl " *
format.pl:#!/usr/bin/perl -w
README.XML.STUFF:It uses format.pl <http://format.pl>, a
perl script...
Then we need to figure out how to deal with the GPLv3 issue.
The buildbot output can be tedious to figure out. I haven't really
spent enough time plugging away at it to be proficient yet either.
Have you been able to reproduce the problems that Richard reported?
If not, and you've tried for a bit, then just say so and I'll try to
help tomorrow or early next week.
It looks like you are packaging the test code/data with the main
package
not in bzip2-ptest. Have a look at:
meta/recipes-support/libpcre/libpcre_8.44.bb
<http://libpcre_8.44.bb>
for an example. There are many more.
Also, if you look at oe-core.git:
$ rgrep LICENSE_ * | grep PN
you can see many examples of sub-packages with different licenses
than the main package. One example is:
meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb
<http://gnutls_3.6.13.bb>
I hope that can address the buildbot problem but I haven't tried it
myself yet.
BTW, Trevor has gotten the YP autobuilder going at Wind River and
he'll be sending a few documentation updates next week or so.
That may help in case you want to reproduce the YP AB test
infrastructure. I expect that you don't _have_ to do so but
I think it would be good if more contributing organizations did
have an instance with only limited builders of the YP AB so that
we can do more testing before Richard runs our changes through
the main system. Richard has cautioned that the YP AB has lots of
builders each of which has many cores but I hope that we can at
least
do some AB checking ourselves.
../Randy
> |
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 20:54, Rahul Kumar <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>
> Hi Richard/Alexander,
>
> I am not able to understand how I can use the below file.
>
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/yocto-autobuilder-helper/tree/config.json
>
> did you mean to say that i have to set MACRO in
local.conf based on
> this file.
>
> *Thanks & Regards,*
> Rahul Kumar
> Software Engineer,Linux Solutions Engineering
> Group,Montavista Software LLC
> Email Id: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <https://plus.google.com/+CodeTwoSoftware>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:46 PM Richard Purdie
> <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 18:30 +0200, Alexander Kanavin
wrote:
> > You need to look at configurations defined here:
> >
>
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/yocto-autobuilder-helper/tree/config.json
> > and replicate them locally. Then you can reproduce the
> failures that
> > the AB gets in those configurations.
>
> That start of the failing logs on the autobuilder
also list out the
> configuration options for that build.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
--
# Randy MacLeod
# Wind River Linux
--
# Randy MacLeod
# Wind River Linux
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#138490):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/138490
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/73224911/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
