From: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
To: Ulf Hermann <ulf.hermann@qt.io>
Cc: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Check for existence of asprintf and vasprintf
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:04:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170223110458.GC10656@stream> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <976de60f-e69d-b57f-7ee5-2091c8c3265d@qt.io>
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:18:53AM +0100, Ulf Hermann wrote:
> First, I'm not sure if we want to import the respective gnulib modules
> directly into the elfutils code base or if you want me to do this in
> my fork. In the latter case the issue is settled as there is no value
> for me in jumping through hoops if the code is not going to be
> upstreamed anyway. So, for now I'm assuming we're talking about
> importing gnulib modules into the elfutils code base.
I would be fine with integrating gnulib code upstream.
Since we already have a lib and m4 directory it would probably
be easiest if we use a new gnulib and gnulib-m4 top-level dir
for that. And we'll have to figure out what the best way to handle
the sources in the repository is. I think I would prefer option 3
https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/manual/html_node/VCS-Issues.html
So normal developers don't need to have gnulib itself installed.
The release manager would run gnulib-tool --update before release.
But maybe there are other ways that are more natural to support?
> > gnulib-tool has a --lgpl=[...] flag so you can automatically abort if
> > the desired license compatibility level isn't met. so you don't have
> > to directly review every module if it isn't aborting.
>
> Are you aware that for most of those modules, building them into elfutils
> restricts the license choices for the resulting combination? Any
> non-trivial combination of the required modules with elfutils makes the
> result de facto GPLv3 only. GPLv3 is fine for me as perfparser is also
> GPLv3, but as elfutils so far is LGPLv3+/GPLv2+ I'm wondering if we want
> to do this. In fact, when just doing the usual
> "configure/make/make install" procedure without reviewing the
> intermediate results, a user would have no way of knowing what license
> applies to the binaries. IMO that is bad and will certainly lead to
> problems somewhere down the line.
As long as everything is upward compatible with GPLv3+ I think that is
fine. It will only be an issue on non-GNU/Linux setups. But we should
indeed make clear during configure time when extra license requirements
would apply because gnulib code is being used/imported. Maybe we can
just have configure warn/error out "Your setup requires importing of
GPLv3+ gnulib code, please configure with --enable-gplv3-gnulib".
Or something like that.
Cheers,
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-23 11:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-22 12:50 Ulf Hermann
2017-02-22 14:40 ` Mike Frysinger
2017-02-22 16:01 ` Ulf Hermann
2017-02-22 16:32 ` Mike Frysinger
2017-02-22 16:45 ` Ulf Hermann
2017-02-22 17:04 ` Mike Frysinger
2017-02-22 17:43 ` Ulf Hermann
2017-02-22 18:57 ` Mike Frysinger
2017-02-23 7:27 ` John Ogness
2017-02-23 9:39 ` Ulf Hermann
2017-02-23 18:51 ` Mike Frysinger
2017-02-24 9:42 ` Ulf Hermann
2017-02-24 19:15 ` Mike Frysinger
2017-02-23 10:18 ` Ulf Hermann
2017-02-23 11:04 ` Mark Wielaard [this message]
2017-02-22 16:38 ` Mark Wielaard
2017-02-23 10:46 ` Ulf Hermann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170223110458.GC10656@stream \
--to=mark@klomp.org \
--cc=elfutils-devel@sourceware.org \
--cc=ulf.hermann@qt.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).