Previously, if for example you had a package called "mx", and a second package called "libomxil" listed in COMMERCIAL_LICENSE (without mx being listed there), it would match mx as being commercially licensed because mx is a substring of libomxil. Fix the search to ensure it only matches the listed package name exactly.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> --- meta/classes/base.bbclass | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta/classes/base.bbclass b/meta/classes/base.bbclass index 3501f4b..104bec8 100644 --- a/meta/classes/base.bbclass +++ b/meta/classes/base.bbclass @@ -340,9 +340,9 @@ python () { if license == "INVALID": bb.fatal('This recipe does not have the LICENSE field set (%s)' % pn) - commercial_license = bb.data.getVar('COMMERCIAL_LICENSE', d, 1) + commercial_license = " %s " % bb.data.getVar('COMMERCIAL_LICENSE', d, 1) import re - pnr = pn.replace('+', "\+") + pnr = "[ \t]%s[ \t]" % pn.replace('+', "\+") if commercial_license and re.search(pnr, commercial_license): bb.debug(1, "Skipping %s because it's commercially licensed" % pn) raise bb.parse.SkipPackage("because it may require a commercial license to ship in a product (listed in COMMERCIAL_LICENSE)") -- 1.7.4.1 _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
