synaptics-killswitch still required?

[acostach]

Hi @agherzan , quick question about https://github.com/agherzan/meta-raspberrypi/commit/7c31b9b4b595c3e0f932391e07a5258a9f966e4c :

Now that https://github.com/RPi-Distro/firmware-nonfree/pull/40 has been merged, is LICENSE_FLAGS = "synaptics-killswitch" kept for a different reason?

Thanks

[agherzan]

I haven't followed up with that update but it looks good to me. @kappapiana what do you think?

[rob3c]

Hi @agherzan and @kappapiana

What's the status of the removal decision for this seemingly-obsolete synaptics-killswitch flag that was added in 2022 via https://github.com/agherzan/meta-raspberrypi/commit/7c31b9b4b595c3e0f932391e07a5258a9f966e4c before the license text changed?

It has been 6 months since this issue was opened, and the removal of the killswitch language upstream in the referenced RPi-Distro commit was merged back in 2023!

I'm not a yocto expert, so please help me understand the consequences of continuing to add the synaptics-killswitch flag after the license text change as part of a yocto build config (until it's removed), and please correct any misunderstandings of the following:

The 2022 commit message suggests it's just a flag to raise awareness to users. That suggests it's just a formality to allow the build to continue without being stopped by the flag, right? It doesn't represent any actual agreement to anything, right? The actual current license text without the killswitch language is what gets included in the yocto distro output, and that language is what seems to matter in terms of the usage agreement, right? If that's the case, then continuing to use the flag until it's removed seems sufficient to build successfully without agreeing to terms that don't exist anymore, rather than going to the trouble of adding a custom layer to override it just to avoiding any percieved intent to agree to the generally-undesired killswitch terms. Is there anything I'm missing about this?