Hi Jaeyoon,

I checked the related codes with PACKAGES_DYNAMIC in multilib.bbclass and 
package.bbclass.
I suspect that it's the do_split_packages function in package.bbclass that 
needs to be fixed.
This function may also need to use rename_package_variables on the dynamically 
generated packages.
You can refer to the multilib_virtclass_handler_postkeyexp function in 
multilib.bbclass. Note that LICENSE is already in "PACKAGEVARS".
Could you please check if the above method works?

Regards,
Qi


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
<[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jaeyoon Jung (LGE) via 
lists.openembedded.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 5:04 PM
To: Richard Purdie <[email protected]>; 
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] systemd: fix libsystemd LICENSE for multilib

> From: Richard Purdie <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 17:33
> To: 정재윤/Task Leader/SW Platform(연)선행Platform개발실 Lightweight System 
> Task <[email protected]>; [email protected] 
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] systemd: fix libsystemd LICENSE for 
> multilib
>  
> On Tue, 2026-02-10 at 14:41 +0900, Jaeyoon Jung (LGE) via 
> lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> > From: Jaeyoon Jung <[email protected]>
> >
> > Prepend ${MLPREFIX} to LICENSE for libsystemd.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jaeyoon Jung <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd.inc | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd.inc 
> > b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd.inc
> > index daf37060d7..80a527dd25 100644
> > --- a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd.inc
> > +++ b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd.inc
> > @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ elaborate transactional dependency-based service 
> > control logic. It can \
> >  work as a drop-in replacement for sysvinit."
> >  
> >  LICENSE = "GPL-2.0-only & LGPL-2.1-or-later"
> > -LICENSE:libsystemd = "LGPL-2.1-or-later"
> > +LICENSE:${MLPREFIX}libsystemd = "LGPL-2.1-or-later"
> >  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = 
> > "file://LICENSE.GPL2;md5=c09786363500a9acc29b147e6e72d2c6 \
> >                      
> > [file://LICENSE.LGPL2.1;md5=be0aaf4a380f73f7e00b420a007368f2"]file://LICENSE.LGPL2.1;md5=be0aaf4a380f73f7e00b420a007368f2"
> >  
> 
> The commit message doesn't explain why.
> 
> In most cases the code should automatically handle MLPREFIX. Are there 
> other similar issues elsewhere and should we be fixing something in 
> the multilib class extension code instead?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard

Yes, we have one in our meta layer that performs a check a bit deeper on 
LICENSE for each package and it ends up with falling back to LICENSE with no 
per-package override.
It's also an option for us to fix ours but I thought that a hardcoded 
per-package override like this should also take account into multilib, like 
other LICENSE:${PN} cases.


Best regards,
---
Jaeyoon Jung
Software Platform Lab. / Corporate R&D / LG Electronics Inc.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#230875): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/230875
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/117733881/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to