It's a contracting issue. You need to specify in writing that the
vendor cannot provide ancient Yocto. Otherwise they won't bother.

Alex

On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 at 09:13, Måns <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yes I know. Not sure why QC is stuck on Thud. Even newer releases from
> QC for the target that we are working on is stuck at Thud.
>
> Mans
>
> Den fre 8 apr. 2022 kl 18:59 skrev Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]>:
> >
> > Thud has been EOL for a long time. You can see when the support been
> > added here (end of 2019 it seems):
> > https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/log/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/incompatible_lic.py?h=master-next
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 18:56, Måns <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am currently on Thud so I am missing the support from what I can
> > > tell to set INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE per image. I have tried to find the
> > > commit that adds that support but am having some problems finding it.
> > > Do you maybe know what I should look for to find the commit that adds
> > > this support?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Den fre 8 apr. 2022 kl 10:16 skrev Alexander Kanavin 
> > > <[email protected]>:
> > > >
> > > > Hello Mans,
> > > >
> > > > please refer to the tests we have for the feature:
> > > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/tree/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/incompatible_lic.py?h=master-next#n95
> > > > (line 95 and below)
> > > >
> > > > The key bit is:
> > > > INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE:pn-core-image-minimal = "GPL-3.0* LGPL-3.0*"
> > > > e.g. apply the restriction only to core-image-minimal.
> > > >
> > > > Alex
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 08:06, Måns <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Alex,
> > > > >
> > > > > Could you maybe clarify what you mean with "setting
> > > > > INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE per image"? Do you mean that you have one
> > > > > specific image that is used when you build an image for release to the
> > > > > customer and then one image for development?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > >
> > > > > Den ons 6 apr. 2022 kl 11:04 skrev Alexander Kanavin 
> > > > > <[email protected]>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd suggest you start by setting INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE per image, 
> > > > > > e.g.
> > > > > > enable gpl3 ban only in the images that ship to the customers and 
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > across the entire build. Then carefully look at what pulls in bash
> > > > > > into those images and why, and reconfigure those pieces to not do 
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > (e.g. by reconfiguring the PACKAGECONFIGs), or rewrite the scripts 
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > posix shell.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alex
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 at 10:59, Mans Zigher <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I cannot use GPLv3 packages in our image build. I am no legal 
> > > > > > > expert
> > > > > > > but from what I can understand most companies will not be able to
> > > > > > > comply with this license without allowing the customer to compile 
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > deploy a new version of any GPLv3 package to the target. I know 
> > > > > > > it is
> > > > > > > possible to comply with this but we are using secure boot and 
> > > > > > > have not
> > > > > > > the time and probably no interest in setting up a solution for
> > > > > > > allowing customers to be able to deploy GPLv3 packages on the 
> > > > > > > target.
> > > > > > > We are trying to make use of INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE but that 
> > > > > > > results in
> > > > > > > several issues. We have made sure that we don't include GPLv3 in 
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > image build using a manual process but would like to use
> > > > > > > INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE to alert any developer about the issue. It 
> > > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > like INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE is a bit harsh since it will catch any
> > > > > > > packages even if it is only part of the SDK and also for native
> > > > > > > packages that are not part of the image build.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I cannot be the only one with this problem so how are other 
> > > > > > > companies
> > > > > > > solving this issue? Are they just not using the 
> > > > > > > INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE?
> > > > > > > Are you setting up a parallel process for checking for any
> > > > > > > incompatible licenses issues?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A more specific issue is that there are so many packages with bash
> > > > > > > dependencies which are pulling in bash which is GPLv3 so how have 
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > solved that? Currently we have done some pretty uggly hacks which 
> > > > > > > I am
> > > > > > > not that happy with but we needed to keep it out of the image.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#56716): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/56716
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/90285507/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to