The README file saved by legal-info does not mention the host package
variant of the saved material. Add them.
Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Signed-off-by: Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
This silences the annoying warning that there is no hash file for our
own COPYING file.
Also change the message so that it is more obvious what we're doing.
Reported-by: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
Cc: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
Currently, the legal-info infra only saves the source archive of a
package. However, that's not enough as we may apply some patches on
packages sources.
We do suggest users to also redistribute the Buildroot sources as part
of their compliance distribution, so the patches bundled in Buildroot
would indeed be included in the compliance distribution.
However, that's still not enough, since we may download some patches, or
the user may use a global patch directory. Patches in there might not
end up in the compliance distribution, and there are risks of
non-conformity.
So, always include patches alongside the source archive.
To ensure reproducibility, we also generate a series file, so patches
can be re-applied in the correct order.
We get the list of patches to include from the list of patches that were
applied by the package infrastructure (via the apply-patches support
script). So, we need to get packages properly extracted and patched
before we can save their legal-info, not just in the case they define
_LICENSE_FILES.
Update the legal-info header accordingly.
Note: this means that, when a package is not patched and defines no
LICENSE_FILES, we will extract and patch it for nothing. There is no
easy way to know whether we have to patch a package or not. We can only
either duplicate the logic to detect patches (bad) or rely on the infra
actually patching the package. Also, a vast majority of packages are
either patched, or define _LICENSE_FILES, so it is best and easiest to
always extract and patch them prior to legal-info.
Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
Cc: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Tested-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Reviewed-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Reviewed-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
In some cases, the toolchain sources are now recovered and available in
the legal-info output. So, adapt the header to use conditional instead
of an definitive negation.
Also update the part about saving the sources: it's not the license list
that defines whether sources are installed, but rather whether the
package is redistributable or not.
Update the header accordingly.
Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
Cc: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Acked-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
This allows to automatically collect material that may be needed to comply with
the license of packages that Buildroot prepares for the target device.
The core of the implementation is made by the following parts:
- in package/pkg-utils.mk some helper functions are defined for common actions
such as generating a warning, producing info about a package etc;
- in package/pkg-gentargets.mk, within the GENTARGETS framework, a new
<PKG>-legal-info target produces all the info for a given package;
- Makefile implements the top-level targets:
- legal-info-prepare creates the output directory and produces legal info
about Buildroot itself and the toolchain, which mostly means just warning
the user that this is not implemented;
- legal-info, the only target that is supposed to be used directly, depends
on all of the above and finishes things by producing the README files from
the various pieces.
Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
