On Wed, 13 May 2020, Quentin Schulz wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 08:40:28AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > On Wed, 13 May 2020, Quentin Schulz wrote: > > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 07:19:59AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > On Wed, 13 May 2020, Richard Leitner wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:39:44PM +0200, Quentin Schulz wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 06:25:01AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > If it's really widely used, maybe something to add to > > > > > > openembedded-core/files/common-licenses/ ? So that you don't need > > > > > > any of > > > > > > the suggested ways? > > > > > > > > > > +1 for adding Unlicense to openembedded-core's common-licenses > > > > > > > > as long as this requires only adding an Unlicense file to that > > > > directory, i can do that shortly. > > > > > > I'm not sure, but there might be a need to add it to > > > SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES in > > > openembedded-core/meta/conf/licenses.conf. > > > > that variable is gone: > > > > commit 64daaf29e2c12c8b587bafdebf9409433187ddf7 > > Author: Peter Kjellerstedt <[email protected]> > > Date: Wed Dec 11 17:48:14 2019 +0100 > > > > licenses.conf: Remove the SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES variable > > > > The SRC_DISTRIBUTE_LICENSES variable and its static list of licenses > > has been replaced by AVAILABLE_LICENSES, which automatically contains > > all available licenses. > > > > > > That'll teach me to check in master instead of my release of Yocto :)
it gets weirder ... the project i'm working with is based on morty so that variable *would* still be relevant, but even adding "Unlicense" to that variable didn't stop the offending recipe from still generating a warning. so i thought, "i wonder if there are any other recipes in the layers i'm working with that have 'Unlicense," and sure enough, there's one: pyelftools (created in-house). so i added pyelftools to the image i'm building, but *that* recipe *didn't* generate a warning, so now i'm thoroughly baffled. and, finally, i decided to check the current state of pyelftools to see what its licensing is, and in meta-python, we have the recipe python3-pyelftools_0.25.bb, wherein we read: LICENSE = "PD" argh ... and if one checks OE/meta/files/common-licenses, there is indeed a license file named "PD" whose contents are simply: This is a placeholder for the Public Domain License so now i'm not sure if a "Unlicense" license file is redundant or what. i'm confused. rday
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#49398): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/49398 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/74178255/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
