incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Subject Re: Bootstrapping a build
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:12:05 GMT
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Stephan Bergmann
<stephan.bergmann.secondary@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Mathias Bauer <Mathias_Bauer@gmx.net>wrote:
>
>> On 15.06.2011 18:07, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:10 AM, Mathias Bauer<Mathias_Bauer@gmx.net>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> there are two things about building OOo that need to be clarified.
>>>>
>>>> Currently we use "configure" to set the build environment. The way we are
>>>> doing it requires that a few GPLed files are part of our code repository:
>>>>
>>>> acinclude.m4
>>>> aclocal.m4
>>>> config.guess
>>>> config.sub
>>>> configure
>>>>
>>>> "configure" is generated from "configure.in" that AFAIK is owned by
>>>> Oracle
>>>> and also resides in OOo's code repository.
>>>>
>>>> How can we do that in a code repository hosted at apache.org?
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is most likely NOT a problem:
>>>
>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#build-tools
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-23
>>>
>>> - Sam Ruby
>>>
>>>
>> I was hoping for that. Excellent. :-)
>>
>
> Is this indeed so?
>
> config.guess and config.sub are clearly marked as falling under the autoconf
> exception.
>
> However, aclocal.m4 contains:
>
> - AC_DEFUN(PKG_CHECK_MODULES ...), just marked as "free software" with
> "unlimited permission to copy and/or distribute it" (so is probably OK);
>
> - AC_DEFUN(AM_PATH_PYTHON ...) and AC_DEFUN(AM_PYTHON_CHECK_VERSION ...),
> marked as GPL without mentioning the autoconf exception.
>
> - AC_DEFUN(AM_RUN_LOG ...), marked as GPL without mentioning the autoconf
> exception.
>
> and acinclude.m4 contains:
>
> - AC_DEFUN(AX_FUNC_WHICH_GETSPNAM_R ...), marked as LGPL without mentioning
> the autoconf exception.
>
> - AC_DEFUN(PKG_CHECK_MODULES_MACHACK ...), which was once added by me,
> carries no explicit license information, and was intended to be covered by
> OOo's normal license (so should be OK).
>
> All of these definitions are actually (directly or indirectly) used in
> configure.in.  (I checked all this in DEV300_m106, but I think the relevant
> files have not changed for quite a while, anyway.)

Good catch.  I stand corrected.

It looks like a small number of things to fix.

> -Stephan

- Sam Ruby

Mime
View raw message