Saul Wold


As a follow-on to yesterday's email and replies, I would like to make the following proposal for dealing with the changes to INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE and associated variables.

Current Usage:

INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE is a list of licenses that are considered incompatible with a distro's requirements. This is used to compare against packages built by a given recipe.

A set of exception variables based on the license name (currently WHITELIST_<license>) that contains a list of recipes that will be checked against the current recipe (PN) being evaluated. If it's in that list then all packages in that recipe will be built and included and the rest of the evaluation will be skipped.

Otherwise, the packages (PKGS) from the recipe will be evaluated to see if any have a package specific license (LICENSE:<pkgname>). If a package has a license other than the INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE the recipe will be built and any packages with the INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE will be excluded from being packaged in package.bbclass via LICENSE_EXCLUSION-<pkgname> internal variable.

The exception is predominately used for GPLv3 related packages, based on the emails replies overnight.


Keep the existing INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE variable with the same behavior. The values in INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE should be SDPX normalized license strings.

As Richard has already suggested an alternative variable that is more meaningful: INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE_EXCEPTION with an a <pkg>:<spdx_lic> value. Rename the LICENSE_EXCLUSION-<pkg> variable to make it clear that it is an internal variable. The usage of the _EXCEPTION variable should contain pkg names not recipe name. ** This would be an important change **

Clean up code as appropriate to ensure the exceptions are handled once and identified during parsing.

I will start working on the implementation, Monday is a holiday in the US, so this should give sometime for this to be reviewed for Tuesday.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.