[OE-core] [PATCH v2 1/6] unfs3: Add a NFSv3 user mode server for use with runqemu

[Phil Blundell]

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 08:32 -0600, Jason Wessel wrote:
> +++ b/meta/files/common-licenses/unfs3
> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> +UNFS3 user-space NFSv3 server
> +(C) 2003, Pascal Schmidt <unfs3-server at ewetel.net>
> +
> +Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> +modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
> +
> +1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice,
> +   this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
> +2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice,
> +   this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation
> +   and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
> +3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products
> +   derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

Isn't this just the 3-clause BSD licence?

>--- /dev/null
>+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/unfs3/unfs3/alternate_rpc_ports.patch
>@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
>+Add ability to specify rcp port numbers
>+
>+In order to run more than one unfs server on a host system, you must
>+be able to specify alternate rpc port numbers.
>+
>+Jason Wessel <jason.wessel at windriver.com>
>+
>+Upstream-Status: Pending

I think you said in the cover letter that the patches had been sent
upstream.  If that's the case then it should be Upstream-Status:
Submitted.

>+RDEPENDS_${PN} = "pseudo"
>+RDEPENDS_${PN}_class-native = "pseudo-native"
>+RDEPENDS_${PN}_class-nativesdk = "pseudo-nativesdk"

That looks a bit odd.  Are the latter two lines doing anything very
useful?

>+# This recipe is intended for -native and -nativesdk builds only,
>+# not target installs:

Why?  If this is really the case, shouldn't it be named unfs3-native in
the first place?

p.