On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Jussi Kukkonen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 31 August 2015 at 17:38, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote:
>> There is alternative suggestion. I think all this is happening for
>> nettle which we have GPLv2 version in core. There doesnt seem to be a
>> full use of libgmp elsewhere.
>> nettle can be built using mini-gmp, as well I think that route should
>> be explored. That also keeps the us honest with our motive of moving
>> all gplv2 legacy packages to layer of its own in future.
>
> Is it actually possible to build a working LGPL2 version of nettle with
> mini-gmp? I did look at that option (and the "--with-mini-nettle" option for
> gnutls) but couldn't figure it out.
>
> With our current nettle (2.7.1) the problems are
> A) it doesn't actually have a "--enable-mini-gmp" option: only one test
> binary seems use mini-gmp

yes I did not consider its old version of gmp

> B) the gmp files that are included are actually LGPL3 (so even if we could
> use them, it would not help the end goal much)

Yes.  Let merge it in. I would have preferred to call it gmp42 or
something in recipe
so it does not cause toolchain problems. but thats a  combination of
GPLv2 building toolchain for target with whitelisting gcc and
binutils.

>
> - Jussi
-- 
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Reply via email to