We use the standard Apache 2.0 file header, described in "APPENDIX: How
to apply the Apache License to your work."
This was primarily automated by running:
git ls-tree -r --name-only HEAD | xargs go run ./util/relicense.go
See go/boringssl-relicensing-triage for the results of triaging the
output of the tool.
As part of this, switch from taking fiat-crypto under MIT license to
Apache 2.0. (It is licensed under MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR BSD-1-Clause.)
The copyright_summary tool can also be used to confirm we didn't
accidentally drop any copyright lines:
# Run before the CL
git grep -l Copyright | xargs go run ./util/copyright_summary.go -out /tmp/old.json
# Run after the CL
git grep -l Copyright | xargs go run ./util/copyright_summary.go -compare /tmp/old.json
Bug: 364634028
Change-Id: I17c50e761e9d077a1f92e25969e50ed35e320c59
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/75852
Reviewed-by: Bob Beck <bbe@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Following the guidance in
https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/releasing/authors,
start maintaining an AUTHORS file.
Update all existing Google copyright lines to 'The BoringSSL Authors'
per the document. This CL also changes the styling to match the new
guidance: removed the '(c)' and the comma.
All other existing copyright lines are left unmodified. Going forward,
our preference will be that new contributions to BoringSSL use 'The
BoringSSL Authors', optionally adding to the AUTHORS file if the
contributor desires.
To avoid being presumptuous, this CL does *not* proactively list every
past contributor in the BoringSSL half of the AUTHORS file. Past
contributors are welcome to send us a patch to be added, or request that
we add you. (Listed or not, the commit log continues to be a more
accurate record, and any existing non-Google copyright lines were left
unmodified.)
The OpenSSL half of the AUTHORS file is seeded with the contents of the
current OpenSSL AUTHORS file, as of writing. The current contents in the
latest revision of the 1.1.1 branch
(b372b1f76450acdfed1e2301a39810146e28b02c) and master
(d992e8729ee38b082482dc010e090bb20d1c7bd5) are identical, just formatted
in text vs Markdown.
Note when reviewing: CONTRIBUTING.md and AUTHORS contain non-mechanical
changes.
Bug: 364634028
Change-Id: I319d0ee63ec021ad85e248e8e3304b9cf9566681
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/74149
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
gopls currently litters our project with a sea of red, because it
assumes Go files are part of a package, but we have a lot of standalone
Go scripts. (If there are C files in the same directory as the script,
it gets upset about cgo. If there are multiple standalone scripts in the
same directory, it gets uspet about duplicate files.)
Per https://github.com/golang/go/issues/49657 and
https://github.com/golang/tools/blob/master/gopls/doc/settings.md#standalonetags-string,
the convention seems to be a go:build ignore tag. Newer versions of
gopls run in a "standalone" mode, so we still get all the nice LSP
features.
As part of this, I had to align the license header comments from /*
block comments */ to // line comments. Go build constraints can only be
preceded by blank lines and line comments. Block comments apparently
aren't allowed. (See https://pkg.go.dev/cmd/go#hdr-Build_constraints.)
If I leave the file unconverted, go fmt will immediately move the
comment to above the license block.
Change-Id: I47c69255522e9aae2bdb97a6e83fcc6ce0cf29d5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/56525
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Auto-Submit: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Plan is:
1. This CL
2. Update the CI/CQ recipe to be able to run this
3. Update the CI/CQ config to enable this on ELF platforms
4. Do not land, but patch out the .note.GNU-stack annotations and
-Wa,--noexecstack and confirm CI/CQ fails. Based on manual testing
and https://crbug.com/boringssl/292#c4, I anticipate we'll only have
coverage on x86 and x86_64 Linux. Currently, our only Arm Linux
builders are Android, which use the LLVM linker. The LLVM linker
doesn't have this design flaw, so it doesn't need .note.GNU-stack in
the first place. It also sounds like GNU ld will make this moot in a
future release.
5. Remove -Wa,--noexecstack from crypto/CMakeLists.txt and confirm CI/CQ
still passes.
Other than generally wanting to test things, the immediate motivation is
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/55626/1/crypto/perlasm/arm-xlate.pl#b246
Bug: 292
Change-Id: Id1c049bfc2b4e8b7e2c8c32ea6456733a588dfe1
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/55645
Auto-Submit: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Bob Beck <bbe@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Bob Beck <bbe@google.com>
David Benjamin