Re: [yocto] [Question] How to handle GPLv3 packages?

From: Måns <mans.zigher@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Kanavin <alex.kanavin@gmail.com>
Cc: Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli@bmw.de>,
	Ross Burton <ross@burtonini.com>,
	Yocto-mailing-list <yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org>
Subject: Re: [yocto] [Question] How to handle GPLv3 packages?
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 12:17:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEhQi8=jurXd+3MaoQJdrrpvQ2WJPTHvvhJBsi+UrpTu-sQgTg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANNYZj-emTizDFCCHL51HDL5Crjsb-SHu7DTO3kxjhA6DLELKQ@mail.gmail.com>

Yes I did something similar initially using BBMASK to minimize the
build and in the end requesting them to supply a more minimal build
setup. The end result was not a pure BSP layer because we needed some
other things to be able to use other parts of the HW. We could
probably have done that our self but did not really have the time to
set up our own solution for it.

Mans

Den fre 8 apr. 2022 kl 11:22 skrev Alexander Kanavin <alex.kanavin@gmail.com>:
>
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 10:32, Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli@bmw.de> wrote:
> > Qualcomm, I know that one :( As integrator for a product
> > you must minimize the impact of the BSP SW delivery and thus allow only
> > bootloader, kernel and low level libraries to be compiled using the
> > BSP vendor delivery, e.g. their meta layers. I BBMASK away most of their
> > high level SW changes, e.g. systemd and other odd patches which I don't need.
>
> At Daimler, I put my foot down, and forced them to cleanly rewrite the
> BSP into an actual BSP layer before we would set up official builds
> with it. It took several months, but eventually we got there.
>
> Alex