[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: openembedded-core
Subject: [OE-core] inconsistency with adding LICENSE lines to images
From: rpjday () crashcourse ! ca (Robert P ! J ! Day)
Date: 2015-02-27 20:58:32
Message-ID: alpine.LFD.2.11.1502271553110.8885 () localhost
[Download RAW message or body]
just noticed the following ... in OE image definition files under
recipes-core:
core-image-base.bb
core-image-minimal.bb
core-image-minimal-dev.bb
core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb
core-image-minimal-mtdutils.bb
it *seems* to make sense that image definitions that require or
include other core image bb files don't need to add the line:
LICENSE = "MIT"
as they pick it up from the include'd or require'd file, but image
recipe files that
inherit core-image
*do* need to define their own license.
but if one then goes under recipes-extended/images, it looks a bit
strange as, for example, here's core-image-full-cmdline.bb:
DESCRIPTION = "A console-only image with more full-featured Linux system \
functionality installed."
IMAGE_FEATURES += "splash ssh-server-openssh"
IMAGE_INSTALL = "\
packagegroup-core-boot \
packagegroup-core-full-cmdline \
${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
"
inherit core-image
so ... what's the licensing there? this image inherits directly from
core-image, but doesn't define a license? am i misunderstanding the
need for a license?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic