On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Anders Darander <and...@chargestorm.se> wrote: > * Steve Sakoman <sako...@gmail.com> [120131 17:50]: >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Anders Darander <and...@chargestorm.se> >> wrote: >> > * Steve Sakoman <st...@sakoman.com> [120131 06:32]: >> >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Saul Wold <s...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> > On 01/30/2012 05:39 PM, Steve Sakoman wrote: > >> >> > I will wait to pull this until I hear back from you with another pull >> >> > request. Thanks for digging into this, better to get it solved now then >> >> > figure it out later that we missed a GPLv2 dependency. > >> >> I'll do a build with the libzypp RDEPENDS change and verify no issues, >> >> and then a test build with the gpg2 -> gpg change and verify that too. > >> >> If it works, then that patch should likely get bundled with the >> >> introduction of a GnuPG V1.4.10 recipe import from oe-classic. > >> > I think you'll have to modify the oe-classic recipe to use GnuPG v1.4.7, >> > as it seems that GnuPG was relicensed to GPLv3 in 1.4.8... At least that >> > was the conclusion I came to when I looked at this last summer. >> > (Unfortunately, I didn't have time to work through it). > >> This makes me wonder whether libzypp/zypper is an appropriate long >> term choice for those who want to avoid GPLv3. > >> The zypp project obviously made the choice to switch to GPLv3 years >> ago and it will be an ongoing problem to try to support old versions >> with GPLv2. > >> Perhaps yum would be a better choice for the GPLv3 averse, since IIRC >> it is still GPLv2. > > How does yum handle the signatures? Does it also do it using > gpg/gpg2-commands? If so, we would probably have the same problem with > yum as with libzypp/zypper. (Possible without having to patch gpg2 -> > gpg, but as they are quite compatible, that should be a minor issue). We > would still have problems using later GnuPG 1.4.x...
I don't know what yum does, and to be honest I'm not too motivated to find out! I'm happy with zypp/zypper and that is the reason for jumping through hoops to get full support for signed repositories :-) Yum was merely mentioned as an option for those who can't deal with GPLv3. > Or is yum (or any other package manager) using GpgME? (The library > designed to make it easier for applications to interface with gpg). If > so, it should be OK, as gpgme is licensed under GPLv2(+?) No idea on this one either! Steve _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
