From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6905F138247 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 01:51:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 79DF3E0A59; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 01:51:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 916FFE09FE for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 01:51:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-68-49-223-78.hsd1.md.comcast.net [68.49.223.78]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mjo) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A73CE33F5D0 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 01:51:23 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52C4C610.1000303@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2014 20:51:12 -0500 From: Michael Orlitzky User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: new global USE flag "srcdist" References: <21188.38566.180273.751353@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> In-Reply-To: <21188.38566.180273.751353@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 353049ba-540d-4eb1-984e-96dce089c2fe X-Archives-Hash: cb4af3712de600cf15c1c676bfce2281 On 01/01/2014 05:28 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > Hi, > According to GLEP 23 [1], the LICENSE variable regulates the software > that is installed on a system. There is however some ambiguity in > this: should it cover the actual files installed on the system, or > everything that is included in the package's tarball? This question > was asked several times in the past and arose in bug 492424 [2] again. Why do I as a user care about the license of a package? I want packages to be in @FREE in case I need to modify (and redistribute) them. But I only need to modify the parts that I use. If an otherwise-GPL package pulls in the latest Justin Bieber CD with USE=badtaste, that's not really an issue for me, because I'm not using it. I'm happy to install the rest of the package with the USE flag unset. The CD might as well be a separate package with a different license as far as I'm concerned. In essence, I don't want to *use* code that isn't @FREE. This includes the installed files, of course, but also the build system (that I use temporarily). We could generalize this to "any file accessed during emerge" to be on the safe side. That ensures that if I need to modify (and redistribute) any part of the software that I use, I can. What use case is there for having the LICENSE apply to anything else? > I've always preferred the first interpretation, because the second one > would inevitably require us to repack many tarballs, in order to keep > their license in @FREE. This would for example include the Linux > kernel, where we could no longer use deblobbing, but would have to > provide our own tarball with firmware blobs removed. Not sure if users > would be happy if we wouldn't install from pristine sources any more. > We also have mirror and fetch restrictions which allow us to control > what tarballs we distribute, independent of the LICENSE variable. I think a better solution here, since these files are *installed*, is to introduce a new local flag (e.g. unfreeblobs) for the kernel that would append to LICENSE by the mechanism described below. > Nevertheless, I also see the point for covering the distfiles > contents. > > Within existing EAPIs we have only one LICENSE variable available. > (Extending it would be possible in future EAPIs, but we would end up > with a very long transition period.) USE conditional syntax is allowed > in LICENSE, though. So I wonder if this couldn't be used for the > intended purpose. For example, for specifying licenses of distfiles: > > LICENSE=" > srcdist? ( )" > > This idea was discussed within the licenses team, and the overall > reaction was positive. > > What do you think? > > Ulrich > > [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0023.html > [2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=492424#c3 >