Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:04:03 +0000 From: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org> To: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, tabthorpe@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: MK_BLOBS build option Message-ID: <CAOfDtXPeCFknB%2BM2XDNVemEyP2xS6FpQ3O-ta%2BJSqVc=KgNKUA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120123193412.GA353@zim.MIT.EDU> References: <20120122201814.GA32081@thorin> <20120123193412.GA353@zim.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi David, El 23 de gener de 2012 19:34, David Schultz <das@freebsd.org> ha escrit: > There has been recent work on the ports system to allow users to > specify what licenses are considered acceptable for software > installed on their machines. =C2=A0The blob issue reflects a similar > concern, so it's worth looking at what they have done to see if > there are any good ideas you might want to adopt: > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0http://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsLicenseInfrastruc= ture > > In particular, maybe someone will want to add a way to disable > building drivers covered by GPL, APSL, etc. =C2=A0So does it make sense > to rename the knob to something along the lines of > `ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES+=3Dblob'? > > Note that this is a mostly uninformed suggestion, so if you're > already aware of the ports license infrastructure work and don't > think it's apropos to this knob, then don't worry about it. I looked in detail at the documentation you pointed. My impression is that this infrastructure is designed to address a very different problem. Some notable differences: - It concerns about things like license compatibility between ports. If there's a license incompatibility in kernel, it affects the whole tree, it's a lot more manual verification work which is already in place. - In src MK_* build options are already stablished practice. Adding new options and using them in Makefiles fits well with the desired goal. - src already has a license split (/gnu, /cddl...) and the diversity of license groups is much smaller. There are already build options concerned with GPL, for example MK_BSD_GREP. When some users have had this need, existing MK_* framework seems to have satisfied them. [1] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2006-March/061725.ht= ml
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOfDtXPeCFknB%2BM2XDNVemEyP2xS6FpQ3O-ta%2BJSqVc=KgNKUA>