Add attributions and license files for non-Rust upstream packages #671
Conversation
iliana
changed the title
iliana
force-pushed
the
more-licenses
branch
2 times, most recently
from
40d7b9e
to
2297194
Compare
| echo "%{name} - %{url}" >> %{buildroot}%{_cross_attribution_file} \ | ||
| echo "SPDX-License-Identifier: %{license}" >> %{buildroot}%{_cross_attribution_file} | ||
| %_cross_attribution_vendor_dir %{_licensedir}/%{name}/vendor | ||
| if [ 0%{?_cross_first_party} -eq 0 ]; then \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it worth this machinery to avoid writing a "pending" license into first-party attribution files? I think I'd rather consistently see a file and have it say "pending" than have it be inconsistent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I put in this machinery to avoid creating an attribution.txt for the workspaces SRPM, because where would you even put it? And at that point I realized the attribution is for third-party packages. A system-wide "Thar is available under LicenseRef-Pending" in the release package would be more appropriate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We chatted and I'm going to figure out the first-party attribution strategy once we have a license to actually copy into places.
|
⬆️ rebase |
This adds attribution.txt and relevant license files to /usr/share/licenses for all remaining packages (other than workspaces).
libgcc and libstd-rust don't have copies of their licenses in /usr/share/licenses yet, as I'll want to plumb that through the SDK container.
If folks want me to squash the per-package attribution commits I will do so.
Testing done: Thar builds.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.