RFR: JDK-8178064: OpenJDK RI binary should include the license file for freetype

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On 2017-06-08 11:28, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 2017-06-08 10:56, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Erik,
>>
>> My only concern is that when doing the bundling, we assume that 
>> FREETYPE_LICENSE is set, but no verification of this is done in 
>> configure. That is, either should the SetupCopyFiles block be 
>> conditional on the license file existing, or the code in 
>> LIB_SETUP_FREETYPE should verify that we have a license if bundling 
>> is enabled. I think enforcing a license file when bundling is the 
>> reight way, so this means adding a check in configure.
>>
> I disagree. SetupCopyFiles is designed to work fine if the FILES input 
> is empty. It will just generate 0 rules in that case, so this is 
> intended from my part. 

I didn't know that. Well, in that case, your code works.

However, I'm not sure I like that behavior of SetupCopyFiles. Sounds 
like it's too easy to get something lost without a warning, e.g. if you 
mistype a variable name somewhere. But let's discuss that at another 
time. :-)

> I do make sure that it's empty in configure so we don't accidentally 
> get rubbish in it however. We do not want to enforce FREETYPE_LICENSE 
> to be set as we are not going to bundle a license for GPL (default) 
> builds, but only when using a different license for the rest of OpenJDK.

Ok, sounds good then.

/Magnus

>
> /Erik
>
>> Apart from that it looks good.
>>
>> I'm also ok if you push this code as it is in jdk9 and file a 
>> follow-up bug for jdk 10 of adding the verification to configure.
>>
>> /Magnus
>>
>>
>> On 2017-06-07 16:14, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Please review this late change for JDK 9. It adds a new configure 
>>> parameter --with-freetype-license, which can optionally be set to 
>>> point to a license file for freetype. If freetype bundling is 
>>> enabled, this license file will be included in the java.desktop.jmod 
>>> file and subsequently in the images/{jdk,jre}/legal/java.desktop 
>>> directory.
>>>
>>> Note that freetype comes with a dual license. For normal GPL OpenJDK 
>>> builds, no additional license is needed as freetype is also GPL. 
>>> This feature is only needed when someone is licensing OpenJDK with a 
>>> different license (which the Oracle reference implementation builds 
>>> do).
>>>
>>> This change is considered noreg-doc and will go into jdk9.
>>>
>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8178064
>>>
>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8178064/webrev.01
>>>
>>> /Erik
>>>
>>
>