From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com (mail-wm1-f65.google.com [209.85.128.65]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.48351.1590492053175796594 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 04:20:53 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@googlemail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=vYMJ6PR4; spf=pass (domain: googlemail.com, ip: 209.85.128.65, mailfrom: matthias.schoepfer@googlemail.com) Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id u188so2840262wmu.1 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 04:20:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=crVwiDSVfVfLtYevVpYoav/M7k1t4HPZbuaVps6hm44=; b=vYMJ6PR4C0/4661W1FQK6xWdbcnDZ0M/lwR5KydXqt31jnhWKIh2unIaVdZRjsWYia D+Dx2hRQBKc55M6UVmVLe5f/PTyLtP6C7TY2msj3GEmHd0GHlCdRIevOp4F4kvorN52r cg9TszcEKSabhl/bb7+2uP0XP773X1Pw+6zMyB92+h2ZsYIfOIDulxbWfrfkNyUK37NJ n1xu5oSRAOjrZltcdlJBkHBeCAt+dO1F0uf4p9dymgOsiS1cqXVWI9VUNczeolZKGfbR POffpVv/uznTwoIipIF39URb4dxbjwLZ9Cm/QvCksAFlDkQQgSYGCN4lj8upbwAZw2S8 m7uQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=crVwiDSVfVfLtYevVpYoav/M7k1t4HPZbuaVps6hm44=; b=q2I2oZMsTL00NZriv2OqhzI7IfEMTcWfrArJ/RWMjMPsvUTo3UgfAzWI93PyTRL6Ji xCruINFz9DSsNC8NNOrRVcj9f4EneFOib0OBwXlEMVLElkQhgpQwyA2PVoClkaPBlh3d zYRO/OMIcCoinLhYNq/4Z1i+AMlN+DjMNVuROlIfxsDhQI/2m+SKpT/c+d4Ue73/kt0e zf2kLlXp1sqCI+9WjRHgmSJF5kTXtSQcIMvuFePk1gcKNq7Fh5JCheDVVpKZq44zYvKx JWdlhtA25F6ZeZbB4xpI2OYC9EkqSFXM7XtkFzhdjdM3dhDzeROLpx73bUcJtQeQ+2w7 z3yw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532CzdQUlHpMHVEZd00OwSzuw8w1fPHB4Ji9ty4glUWD/FgA/pfe fHPUli0FpAhhlCB4tpBlDEI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxouKpa+yxbdWqtOEwGV5MNMPpovQjJIH5bBBlqz5jo4WsNklu8dBk/zPdpOMZdDjOjVpQdBw== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c385:: with SMTP id s5mr995294wmj.121.1590492051643; Tue, 26 May 2020 04:20:51 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [172.16.100.14] ([213.168.66.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 190sm14868383wmb.23.2020.05.26.04.20.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 26 May 2020 04:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [OE-core] [meta-oe][PATCH 3/4] libgcrypt: made libgcrypt-lic license "GPLv2+ & LGPLv2.1+" To: Richard Purdie , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Cc: Matthias Schoepfer References: <20200526081233.62413-1-matthias.schoepfer@googlemail.com> <20200526081233.62413-3-matthias.schoepfer@googlemail.com> From: "Matthias Schoepfer" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 13:20:50 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Richard, On 5/26/20 10:19 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 10:12 +0200, Matthias Schoepfer via > lists.openembedded.org wrote: >> From: Matthias Schoepfer >> >> With the exception of dumpsexp.c, which is GPLv3, all other parts >> of libgcrypt are GPLv2+ & LGPLv2.1+, BSD or MIT or other "permissive" >> licenses. >> >> If libgcrypt-lic is not set to "GPLv2+ & LGPLv2.1+", image creation >> will >> fail with settings like >> >> INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE = "GPLv3 LGPLv3 GPLv3+ LGPLv3+ GPL-3.0 LGPL-3.0 >> AGPL-3.0" >> COPY_LIC_MANIFEST = "1" >> COPY_LIC_DIRS = "1" >> LICENSE_CREATE_PACKAGE = "1" >> >> Signed-off-by: Matthias Schoepfer >> --- >> meta/recipes-support/libgcrypt/libgcrypt_1.8.5.bb | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/libgcrypt/libgcrypt_1.8.5.bb >> b/meta/recipes-support/libgcrypt/libgcrypt_1.8.5.bb >> index 4e0eb0a169..fd40cdcf83 100644 >> --- a/meta/recipes-support/libgcrypt/libgcrypt_1.8.5.bb >> +++ b/meta/recipes-support/libgcrypt/libgcrypt_1.8.5.bb >> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ SECTION = "libs" >> LICENSE = "GPLv2+ & LGPLv2.1+ & GPLv3+" >> LICENSE_${PN} = "LGPLv2.1+" >> LICENSE_${PN}-dev = "GPLv2+ & LGPLv2.1+" >> +LICENSE_${PN}-lic = "GPLv2+ & LGPLv2.1+" >> LICENSE_dumpsexp-dev = "GPLv3+" > > I don't like this approach at all. Its obviously inconvenient if your > image uses only the non-GPLv3 pieces but this doesn't change the fact > that the main package license does include GLPv3 and ${PN}-lic is right > to include it. You're breaking the metadata to fit your use case for > convenience. > > If you're excluding GPLv3 things from packaging, you could then (and > only then) justifiably adjust ${PN}-lic to a different license so the > code should be doing that, not changing the underlying metadata to suit > you. The question here seems to be, is the GPLv3 License itself GPLv3 licensed. I followed the approach Khem Raj gave me on the yocto mailing list. I do not like the approach either, but lack a better solution. In this very specific package, only one .c file is licensed GPLv3, even the COPYING file claims, everything is GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1+. dumpsexp, the only GPLv3 file, is not even in the package by default. The line LICENSE_${PN} = "LGPLv2.1+" pretty much tells the tale here. Also, LICENSE file states, that there are other licenses also involved, BSD 3 Clause, Public Domain and OCB license... Thanks and Regards, Matthias -- Dr.-Ing. Matthias Schöpfer matthias.schoepfer@googlemail.com