Em Thu, 5 Sep 2019 11:27:03 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:23:13AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > The author of the license-rules.rst file wanted to be very restrict > > with regards to the location of the SPDX header. It says that > > the SPDX header "shall be added at the first possible line in > > a file which can contain a comment". Not happy with this already > > restrictive requiement, it goes further: > > > > "For the majority of files this is the first line, except for > > scripts", opening an exception to have the SPDX header at the > > second line, if the first line starts with "#!". > > > > Well, it turns that this is too restrictive for Python scripts, > > and may cause regressions if this would be enforced. > > > > As mentioned on: > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/728891/correct-way-to-define-python-source-code-encoding > > > > Python's PEP-263 [1] dictates that an script that needs to default to > > UTF-8 encoding has to follow this rule: > > > > 'Python will default to ASCII as standard encoding if no other > > encoding hints are given. > > > > To define a source code encoding, a magic comment must be placed > > into the source files either as first or second line in the file' > > > > And: > > 'More precisely, the first or second line must match the following > > regular expression: > > > > ^[ \t\f]*#.*?coding[:=][ \t]*([-_.a-zA-Z0-9]+)' > > > > [1] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0263/ > > > > If a script has both "#!" and the charset encoding line, we can't place > > a SPDX tag without either violating license-rules.rst or breaking the > > script by making it crash with non-ASCII characters. > > > > So, add a sort notice saying that, for Python scripts, the SPDX > > header may be up to the third line, in order to cover the case > > where both "#!" and "# .*coding.*UTF-8" lines are found. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst | 7 +++++-- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > > index 2ef44ada3f11..5d23e3498b1c 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > > @@ -64,9 +64,12 @@ License identifier syntax > > possible line in a file which can contain a comment. For the majority > > of files this is the first line, except for scripts which require the > > '#!PATH_TO_INTERPRETER' in the first line. For those scripts the SPDX > > - identifier goes into the second line. > > + identifier goes into the second line\ [1]_. > > > > -| > > +.. [1] Please notice that Python scripts may also need an encoding rule > > + as defined on PEP-263, which should be defined either at the first > > + or the second line. So, for such scripts, the SPDX identifier may > > + go up to the third line. > > > > 2. Style: > > > > If you are going to do this, can you also fix up scripts/spdxcheck.py to > properly catch this, Hmm... it defaults to analyze the first 15 lines: ap.add_argument('-m', '--maxlines', type=int, default=15, help='Maximum number of lines to scan in a file. Default 15') So, I guess it won't require any changes. > as well as fixing up the location of the spdx tag > line in the file itself? Good point. I'll write a patch fixing the SPDX location at the three files where the coding location is at the wrong place. > > thanks, > > greg k-h Thanks, Mauro
