OECore license fixes: meta/*

This is a quick audit of only the most obviously wrong licenses
found within OECore. These fixes fall into four areas:

- LICENSE field had incorrect format so that the parser choked
- LICENSE field has a license with no version
- LICENSE field was actually incorrect
- LICENSE field has an imaginary license that didn't exist

This fixes most of the LICENSE warnings thrown, along with my prior
commit adding additional licenses to common-licenses and additional
SPDXLICENSEMAP entries.

HOWEVER..... there is much to be done on the license front.
For a list of recipes with licenses that need obvious fixing see:

https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/License_Audit

That said, I would suggest another license audit as I've found
enough inconsistencies. A good suggestion is when in doubt, look at
how openSuse or Gentoo or Debian license the package.

(From OE-Core rev: 3083dd70b3a9fa01fcc3cf00373b05502505996e)

Signed-off-by: Elizabeth Flanagan <elizabeth.flanagan@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>

1 files changed, 8 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/meta/recipes-extended/byacc/byacc_20110908.bb b/meta/recipes-extended/byacc/byacc_20110908.bb
index 5969d0abef..5e01c25f72 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-extended/byacc/byacc_20110908.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-extended/byacc/byacc_20110908.bb
@@ -1,5 +1,11 @@
-PR = "r0"
-LICENSE="other-BSD"
+PR = "r1"
+
+# Sigh. This is one of those places where everyone licenses it differently. Someone
+# even apply UCB to it (Free/Net/OpenBSD). The maintainer states that:
+# "I've found no reliable source which states that byacc must bear a UCB copyright."
+# Setting to PD as this is what the upstream has it as.
+
+LICENSE="PD"
 LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://package/debian/copyright;md5=4dc4c30f840a7203fb6edf20b3db849e"
 require byacc.inc