[Buildroot] Buildroot and GPL compliance

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 14 December 2011 02:40:54 Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> * What about the tarballs? Should the tarballs themselves be included
> in the distribution, or would they be downloaded from the web by the
> user running buildroot? I think it is safer to include the tarballs,
> since you never know whether the official location will continue to
> exist in the future (or be temporarily out-of-order, as with
> kernel.org)

it would be simplest for people distributing binaries upon request, but if 
they provide URLs and they're available, that should be satisfactory.

> * How to handle proprietary applications? Even though during
> development these applications may be build from within buildroot
> (when sources are available), one would typically not want to
> distribute the sources to the end-user. Still, in order to be able to
> regenerate the system, I think the user should have access to the
> binary versions of these applications. How do we handle this, what isorg
> the best practice?

there's no legal requirement that people distributing binaries make this easy.

> Other discussion points are welcome.

what might be cool is adding a target that produces a tarball of everything 
that we expect would be required for license compliance.  should be somewhat 
easy to automate.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120106/4a9adca4/attachment.asc>