As @dlakelan has already highlighted, GPLv2 requires you to
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
clause (c) only applies "only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above."
Further, let's look at the licensing of a BSD component, that is very likely present, hostapd and wpa_supplicant
From README
of that source distribution:
License
-------
This software may be distributed, used, and modified under the terms of
BSD license:
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. Neither the name(s) of the above-listed copyright holder(s) nor the
names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products
derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
"AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
(INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
Section (2) there clearly calls out that the license be provided in conjunction with the binary distribution. This is common with the non-GPL-style licenses, under which many of the packages are contributed.
While many package-based OSes include the license in the packages and install it with the package, this is not the case in OpenWRT. Android handles this by collecting all the licenses and installing them on the ROM, typically as system/etc/NOTICE.html.gz
. GPL isn't the only license that should be complied with.
There are more "challenges" such as the kernel config not being included in config.seed
, the OpenWRT version string not always being reversible to a specific commit, the feeds changing with time (though the manifest does help with this), but these are above and beyond the failure to comply with the most basic requirements of the GPL licenses and the non-GPL licenses.
The Github reference was provided as a specific example, not a specific request. Thankfully the LEDE Project and, by inclusion, the OpenWRT Project already have https://forum.openwrt.org/tos#2 in place, which specifically speaks to either making available directly, or by linking, or any other means that
you have fully complied with any third-party licenses relating to the Content, and have done all things necessary to successfully pass through to end users any required terms;
Posting a link to a "bare" binary does not accomplish that.