On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 16:19 +0000, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Purdie <redacted>
Sent: den 25 mars 2021 15:27
To: Peter Kjellerstedt <redacted>; Oleksiy Obitotskyi -
X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) [off-list ref]; Luca Bocassi
[off-list ref]; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: bluelightning@bluelightning.org; Khem Raj <redacted>
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in separate
recipe to allow bootstrapping

On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 14:22 +0000, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:

quoted

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Purdie <redacted>
Sent: den 25 mars 2021 10:34
To: Oleksiy Obitotskyi -X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco)
[off-list ref]; Luca Bocassi [off-list ref];
openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: bluelightning@bluelightning.org; Peter Kjellerstedt
[off-list ref]; Khem Raj [off-list ref]
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v11] util-linux: split uuid in separate
recipe to allow bootstrapping

On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 09:17 +0000, Oleksiy Obitotskyi -X (oobitots -
GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) wrote:

quoted

Could you look into this warning.

WARNING: util-linux-2.36.2-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: util-linux-

dev

quoted

quoted

rdepends on util-linux-libuuid-dev, but it isn't a build dependency?
[build-deps]

quoted

https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/61/builds/3226

quoted

quoted

That failure was my fault when testing some fixes.

I've sent out a patch which renames util-linux-uuid to util-linux-

libuuid

quoted

quoted

and sorts out the license issue Peter reported.

I don't mind the recipe being renamed and cleaned up, but I would prefer
to see my entire patch for the license parts being either integrated

before

quoted

this or squashed into it, whichever you prefer. It does not make sense

to

quoted

use the same LIC_FILES_CHKSUM for util-linux-libuuid as for util-linux,
and setting the other LICENSE variables in util-linux.inc no longer

makes

quoted

sense as they are only relevant for util-linux.

I'm torn on that. Code with the other licenses is present, just not used
in the final output and I personally suspect that having one LIC_FILES_CHKSUM
is going to be easier to maintain in the future rather than two separate
ones.

I actually checked all the files that go into -dev and -src before suggesting 
this change, and all files are either marked as public domain or use a 
BSD-3-Clause license.

There is a difference between what ends up in ${S} and what ends up in the 
binary packages. LICENSE clearly governs the latter. Its the scope of 
LIC_FILES_CHECKSUM which there are differences of opinion on.

Cheers,

Richard