WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo

DISCUSSION Steffen Sledz 4 participants 11 messages May 8, 2015 – May 13, 2015

Share & tools

Steffen Sledz

author

2015-05-08 11:07 UTC #0 lore raw

Since switching from dizzy to fido we've some warnings related to some of our own closed source packages.

WARNING: log_check: There is a warn message in the logfile
WARNING: log_check: Matched keyword: [WARNING:]
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo

The recipes contain lines like this one:

LICENSE = "CLOSED"

How should we fix the recipe to avoid the warning?

Signature · 7 lines

DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:[email protected]
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Paul Eggleton

2015-05-08 12:39 UTC #1 lore raw

Hi Steffen,

Quoted 8 lines · On Friday 08 May 2015 13:07:35 Steffen Sledz wrote:

Since switching from dizzy to fido we've some warnings related to some of our own closed source packages.
WARNING: log_check: There is a warn message in the logfile
WARNING: log_check: Matched keyword: [WARNING:]
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo

Quoted 5 lines

The recipes contain lines like this one:
LICENSE = "CLOSED"
How should we fix the recipe to avoid the warning?

I think the part of the code that produces this warning probably should be ignoring the CLOSED value. Can I ask you to please file a bug? Feel free to add me on CC.

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Otavio Salvador

2015-05-08 12:41 UTC #2 lore raw

Quoted 11 lines · Paul Eggleton

Quoted 10 lines · On Friday 08 May 2015 13:07:35 Steffen Sledz wrote:
Since switching from dizzy to fido we've some warnings related to some of our own closed source packages.
WARNING: log_check: There is a warn message in the logfile
WARNING: log_check: Matched keyword: [WARNING:]
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo
The recipes contain lines like this one:

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines
LICENSE = "CLOSED"
How should we fix the recipe to avoid the warning?
I think the part of the code that produces this warning probably should be ignoring the CLOSED value. Can I ask you to please file a bug? Feel free to add me on CC.

You can use proprietary.

Signature · 3 lines

Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750

Paul Eggleton

2015-05-08 12:47 UTC #3 lore raw

Quoted 16 lines · On Friday 08 May 2015 09:40:48 Otavio Salvador wrote:

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Paul Eggleton
Quoted 13 lines · <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 12 lines · On Friday 08 May 2015 13:07:35 Steffen Sledz wrote:
Since switching from dizzy to fido we've some warnings related to some of our own closed source packages.
WARNING: log_check: There is a warn message in the logfile
WARNING: log_check: Matched keyword: [WARNING:]
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo
The recipes contain lines like this one:
LICENSE = "CLOSED"

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
How should we fix the recipe to avoid the warning?
I think the part of the code that produces this warning probably should be ignoring the CLOSED value. Can I ask you to please file a bug? Feel free to add me on CC.
You can use proprietary.

If you mean "Proprietary", yes there is a common license file for that but then I believe you will get an error if LIC_FILES_CHKSUM is not set in the recipe.

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Mike Looijmans

2015-05-11 06:54 UTC #4 lore raw

In reply to Paul Eggleton

What is one expected to do when one justs wants to add the missing license to the "licenses collected for ..."?

I'm a bit spoiled now, most OE messages explain what it expects me to do to fix the problem.

Quoted 15 lines · Paul Eggleton

Hi Steffen,
Quoted 12 lines · On Friday 08 May 2015 13:07:35 Steffen Sledz wrote:
Since switching from dizzy to fido we've some warnings related to some of our own closed source packages.
WARNING: log_check: There is a warn message in the logfile
WARNING: log_check: Matched keyword: [WARNING:]
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo
The recipes contain lines like this one:
LICENSE = "CLOSED"

Quoted 9 lines

Quoted 1 line
How should we fix the recipe to avoid the warning?
I think the part of the code that produces this warning probably should be ignoring the CLOSED value. Can I ask you to please file a bug? Feel free to add me on CC.
Cheers,
Paul

Kind regards,

Mike Looijmans
System Expert

TOPIC Embedded Products Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
Telefax: +31 (0) 499 33 69 70
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.topicproducts.com

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Mike Looijmans

2015-05-11 08:58 UTC #5 lore raw

Hmm, I cannot figure it out... I have in a recipe:

LICENSE = "internal"
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE;md5=cf85de037de7ae12cc2d0059741fdbae"

Then in my layer.conf:

LICENSE_PATH += "${LAYERDIR}/licenses"

I have a file called "internal" in that path. Still, I get:

WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed internal was not in the licenses collected for ...

What am I missing still then? What does the warning mean? I thought I got everything right, but either the licensing rules have changed or I never got it right in the first place and a check was added to make me aware of that.

Quoted 5 lines · Mike Looijmans

What is one expected to do when one justs wants to add the missing license to the "licenses collected for ..."?
I'm a bit spoiled now, most OE messages explain what it expects me to do to fix the problem.

Kind regards,

Mike Looijmans
System Expert

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Paul Eggleton

2015-05-11 09:09 UTC #8 lore raw

In reply to Mike Looijmans

Hi Mike,

If you want to do this you need to add a generic license file for the license in question, which means extending LICENSE_PATH in your custom layer to a directory containing a file named with the license. (However, for "CLOSED" this would not be the right course because "CLOSED" doesn't specify one particular license, hence my comment about this being a bug.)

You're right that the error message isn't as helpful as it could be. We should fix that as well.

Cheers,
Paul

Quoted 47 lines · On Monday 11 May 2015 08:54:25 Mike Looijmans wrote:

What is one expected to do when one justs wants to add the missing license to the "licenses collected for ..."?
I'm a bit spoiled now, most OE messages explain what it expects me to do to fix the problem.
M.
Quoted 15 lines · Paul Eggleton
Hi Steffen,
Quoted 12 lines · On Friday 08 May 2015 13:07:35 Steffen Sledz wrote:
Since switching from dizzy to fido we've some warnings related to some of our own closed source packages.
WARNING: log_check: There is a warn message in the logfile
WARNING: log_check: Matched keyword: [WARNING:]
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo
The recipes contain lines like this one:
LICENSE = "CLOSED"
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
How should we fix the recipe to avoid the warning?
I think the part of the code that produces this warning probably should be ignoring the CLOSED value. Can I ask you to please file a bug? Feel free to add me on CC.
Cheers,
Paul
Kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Embedded Products
Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
Telefax: +31 (0) 499 33 69 70
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.topicproducts.com
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Paul Eggleton

2015-05-11 09:36 UTC #6 lore raw

In reply to Mike Looijmans

At a guess, maybe do_populate_lic didn't re-execute for this recipe. Does it still happen if you bitbake -c cleansstate the recipe and try again?

Cheers,
Paul

Quoted 39 lines · On Monday 11 May 2015 10:58:07 Mike Looijmans wrote:

Hmm, I cannot figure it out... I have in a recipe:
LICENSE = "internal"
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE;md5=cf85de037de7ae12cc2d0059741fdbae"
Then in my layer.conf:
LICENSE_PATH += "${LAYERDIR}/licenses"
I have a file called "internal" in that path. Still, I get:
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed internal was not in the licenses collected for ...
What am I missing still then? What does the warning mean? I thought I got everything right, but either the licensing rules have changed or I never got it right in the first place and a check was added to make me aware of that.
Quoted 6 lines · Mike Looijmans
What is one expected to do when one justs wants to add the missing license to the "licenses collected for ..."?
I'm a bit spoiled now, most OE messages explain what it expects me to do to
fix the problem.
Kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Embedded Products
Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
Telefax: +31 (0) 499 33 69 70
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.topicproducts.com
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Mike Looijmans

2015-05-11 09:39 UTC #7 lore raw

Quoted 2 lines · Paul Eggleton

At a guess, maybe do_populate_lic didn't re-execute for this recipe. Does it still happen if you bitbake -c cleansstate the recipe and try again?

Yes, it even complains about this on a completely fresh build.

Quoted 45 lines

Cheers,
Paul
Quoted 39 lines · On Monday 11 May 2015 10:58:07 Mike Looijmans wrote:
Hmm, I cannot figure it out... I have in a recipe:
LICENSE = "internal"
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE;md5=cf85de037de7ae12cc2d0059741fdbae"
Then in my layer.conf:
LICENSE_PATH += "${LAYERDIR}/licenses"
I have a file called "internal" in that path. Still, I get:
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed internal was not in the licenses collected for ...
What am I missing still then? What does the warning mean? I thought I got everything right, but either the licensing rules have changed or I never got it right in the first place and a check was added to make me aware of that.
Quoted 6 lines · Mike Looijmans
What is one expected to do when one justs wants to add the missing license to the "licenses collected for ..."?
I'm a bit spoiled now, most OE messages explain what it expects me to do to
fix the problem.
Kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Embedded Products
Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
Telefax: +31 (0) 499 33 69 70
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.topicproducts.com
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Kind regards,

Mike Looijmans
System Expert

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Mike Looijmans

2015-05-12 06:03 UTC #9 lore raw

In reply to Paul Eggleton

Quoted 3 lines · Paul Eggleton

If you want to do this you need to add a generic license file for the license in question, which means extending LICENSE_PATH in your custom layer to a directory containing a file named with the license.

I did that, but it didn't get rid of the warning message (see previous post).

Quoted 2 lines

You're right that the error message isn't as helpful as it could be. We should fix that as well.

Well if I knew what to do myself, I could provide a patch for that...

Kind regards,

Mike Looijmans
System Expert

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Steffen Sledz

author

2015-05-13 10:59 UTC #10 lore raw

In reply to Paul Eggleton

Quoted 13 lines · Paul Eggleton

Hi Steffen,
Quoted 10 lines · On Friday 08 May 2015 13:07:35 Steffen Sledz wrote:
Since switching from dizzy to fido we've some warnings related to some of our own closed source packages.
WARNING: log_check: There is a warn message in the logfile
WARNING: log_check: Matched keyword: [WARNING:]
WARNING: log_check: WARNING: The license listed CLOSED was not in the licenses collected for foo
The recipes contain lines like this one:

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines
LICENSE = "CLOSED"
How should we fix the recipe to avoid the warning?
I think the part of the code that produces this warning probably should be ignoring the CLOSED value. Can I ask you to please file a bug? Feel free to add me on CC.

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7752

Signature · 7 lines

DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:[email protected]
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058