| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 31/07/13 03:58 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>>>> On Wed, 31 Jul 2013, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> Just to bring the list up to speed -- in a conversation in |
| 8 |
>> #gentoo-dev I proposed that what we do, instead of setting the |
| 9 |
>> default in make.globals, is to leave that default as-is and to |
| 10 |
>> add in the stage3 make.conf files the lines: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>> # [some comment that says what this is and to look in the |
| 13 |
>> handbook ] ACCEPT_LICENSE="-* @FREE" # firmware in the linux |
| 14 |
>> kernel needs additional licenses, so add # them by default. |
| 15 |
>> Please remove if you do not wish to accept. |
| 16 |
>> ACCEPT_LICENSE+="freedist" |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I don't like to enable freedist globally for all packages (and if |
| 19 |
> it's only because I fear that it would invite devs to abuse |
| 20 |
> "freedist" in the same way as they abused "as-is"). So either this |
| 21 |
> should be moved to package.license, or we should create an extra |
| 22 |
> license label that is used exclusively for kernel firmware. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> freedist is a really bad approximation for the complicated |
| 25 |
> situation anyway. It is known that some of the firmware is not |
| 26 |
> redistributable at all. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Ulrich |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I was thinking the same thing -- a separate license label for |
| 32 |
linux-firmware and kernel packages, that is -- there's over 170 |
| 33 |
packages right now that have 'freedist' in their LICENSE var.. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 38 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlH5bMQACgkQ2ugaI38ACPA4XgD9HkLxqQ5XykfpcRX8AegADj0x |
| 41 |
X2OBVtXWpPyNXB2RYNEA/20dtGcLbTCg+Q/uveHU3hgcq/AgqQTWtz+dN+m0YIU9 |
| 42 |
=9pLu |
| 43 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives