[Buildroot] Is GPLv2 the right license for Buildroot?
Peter Korsgaard
jacmet at uclibc.org
Mon Sep 16 21:12:55 UTC 2013
>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com> writes:
Hi,
Thomas> So, I believe that we should either:
Thomas> (1) Clarify and document how we believe the GPL terms apply to
Thomas> Buildroot (this would probably be a long discussion process, in
Thomas> which the SFLC should probably participate). When I see the
Thomas> discussions around BR2_EXTERNAL where the package .mk files and
Thomas> Config.in files may be seen as derivative work, but not the root
Thomas> filesystem overlay, or that package .mk files for GPL packages
Thomas> should be under the GPL, but not necessarily .mk files for non-GPL
Thomas> packages, I believe it is way too complicated for users. To me, it
Thomas> seems like complying with the Buildroot license is more
Thomas> complicated than using Buildroot itself, which is kind of silly.
We have already tried to clarify it in the user manual:
http://buildroot.net/downloads/manual/manual.html#_complying_with_the_buildroot_license
E.G. Buildroot should be handled just like how you handle the Linux
kernel and Busybox.
Thomas> (2) Change the Buildroot license to a non-copyleft license. Of course,
Thomas> that requires contacting a lot of people, but maybe not so much:
Thomas> over the last 3-4 years, the vast majority of the Buildroot code
Thomas> base has been rewritten, and many of the people having worked on
Thomas> that are still around today.
It's imho still too many people to be realistic:
git shortlog -s --since='3 years' | wc -l
230
Thomas> What other build systems are doing:
Thomas> * Yocto/OpenEmbeded: bitbake is under GPLv2, the rest (package
Thomas> recipes) is under MIT.
Thomas> * PTXdist is under GPLv2, but has a small license clarification "Note:
Thomas> PTXdist is a build system which generates a distribution for
Thomas> embedded systems. This license does only cover the build system
Thomas> itself and doesn't affect the license of managed software in any
Thomas> way, even if it might be distributed together with the build
Thomas> system." I believe it doesn't really clarify completely how the GPL
Thomas> applies to a build system.
Thomas> * OpenBricks is under GPLv2.
Thomas> * OpenWRT is under GPLv2, since it is originally a fork of Buildroot.
Thomas> * LTIB is under GPLv2.
So they are basically all in the same boat as us.
--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
More information about the buildroot
mailing list