[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/5] legal-info: extract even no-redistribute packages
Yann E. MORIN
yann.morin.1998 at free.fr
Sat Jun 21 22:08:36 UTC 2014
Luca, All,
On 2014-06-18 23:17 +0200, Luca Ceresoli spake thusly:
> Dear Yann,
>
> Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> >From: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr>
> >
> >Currently, if a package is marked _REDISTRIBUTE = NO, then legal-info
> >will not try to extract it first.
> >
> >If that package also declares some _LICENSE_FILES, legal-info fails
> >if it is the only action we're trying to run:
> >
> > $ cat defconfig
> > BR2_INIT_NONE=y
> > BR2_PACKAGE_LIBFSLCODEC=y
> > $ make BR2_DEFCONFIG=$(pwd)/defconfig defconfig
> > $ make libfslcodec-legal-info
> > /bin/sh: /home/ymorin/dev/buildroot/O/legal-info/licenses.txt: No such file or directory
> > make[1]: *** [libfslcodec-legal-info] Error 1
>
> Note that the present patchset does not solve _this_ error.
>
> The error that your patchset _does_ solve is:
>
> $ make BR2_DL_DIR=~/src legal-info-prepare libfslcodec-legal-info
> >>> Collecting legal info
> cat:
> /home/murray/devel/buildroot-test/output/build/libfslcodec-3.5.7-1.0.0/EULA:
> No such file or directory
> make: *** [libfslcodec-legal-info] Error 1
Well, that's not even the error I'm trying to solve. In fact, I'm trying
to solve this:
$ cat defconfig
BR2_arm=y
BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BUILDROOT_EGLIBC=y
BR2_PACKAGE_LIBFSLCODEC=y
$ make BR2_DEFCONFIG=$(pwd)/defconfig defconfig
$ make legal-info
[--SNIP--]
cat: /home/ymorin/dev/buildroot/O/build/libfslcodec-3.5.7-1.0.0/EULA: No
such file or directory
> The error that you reported due to the fact that output/legal-info has
> not been created yet.
Indeed. I was a bit too fast at writing the commit log (it happens quite
often these days, I must be moire careful.) Sorry.
> For real cases I don't see a big point in
> running anything else than `make legal-info`.
So do I.
[--SNIP--]
> >This implies that we now need to explicitly add PKG-source as a dependency
> >of legal-info for packages we want to save (ie. redistributable, non-local
> >and non-overriden packages).
>
> Said this way, it looks like we're adding a dependency. Instead we are
> changing the dependence from PKG-extract to PKG-source, which is one
> step less (-extract implies -source), so bottom line we are removing a
> dependency.
>
> Better explained IMO:
> This implies that we now need only PKG-source, not PKG-extract anymore,
> as a dependency of legal-info for packages we want to save (.....).
OK, will rephrase.
[--SNIP--]
> >+# If the package declares _LICENSE_FILES, we need to extract it,
> >+# for overriden, local or normal remote packages alike, whether
>
> Ditto.
Will fix that and the others.
[--SNIP--]
> With the above fixed, and once rebased on top of master, and since I'm
> OK with all of the very few code lines you touched:
> Reviewed-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca at lucaceresoli.net>
>
> [Quick test on top of e00c631ef4aa, will test again once rebased]
> Tested-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca at lucaceresoli.net>
OK, thank you! :-)
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
--
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
| Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
More information about the buildroot
mailing list