On 06/03/2014 12:44, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 22:54:46 +0000, Joseph wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
have you yourself personally achieved GPL compliance in this way? Or
have you been able to compile, say, a linux kernel on one machine,
then setup another machine from scratch and produce a kernel with an
identical checksum?
..nope, I've been much to busy at Groklaw.net.
(The closest thing would be my own wee bash stunts ahead of
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Scripted_Compilation_on_Linux_Debian/Ubuntu
but we don't do checksum listing here yet, various other things
missing, e.g. building .deb etc packaging, but I did get the guys
to add brlcad style nameing so fgfs can live together with e.g.
boostv1.54.0-4+b1-fgfs-w-glsl-$(git-commit-du-jour) in the same path,
using the distro packaging system to keep track of the experiments,
but we don't use this brlcad style names here, we drop all builds
in their own install trees.)
I may have skimmed too quickly, but that page seems to be more about
one-step builds. One step builds are great engineering practice (but not
required by the GPL).
..but this script is a fine start.
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Scripted_Compilation_on_Linux_Debian/Ubuntu
Did you intend to put a different link from the previous one here?
The GPL only requires them to provide source that matches the
binaries, it does not (by my reading) require them to provide proof
beyond doubt that the source and binaries match.
..then we disagree on our readings, but I do agree it's hard to
require them to provide proof beyond doubt that the source and
binaries match when we have no standard way to prove compliance,
this also leaves jurors etc at the mercy of litigators hiring
more or less sleazy expert witness telling stories on things
the jurors and judges can't easily understand and verify.
The GPL (v2) says they must provide " a complete machine-readable copy
of the corresponding source code". I find it hard to interpret this in
the way you suggest.
Although I may appear to be negative, I must state that I absolutely
applaud the efforts to try and produce consistent checksums for binaries
compiled from the same source. If consistent checksums could be
achieved, it would help in a huge number of areas, including GPL compliance.
Joseph
