On Thu, Sep 24 2020, Florian Viehweger <open...@out-of-creativity.de> wrote: > Hi, > >> Nothing changed in the build, so I don't think this needs REVISION. >> I'm probably wrong though and someone will correct me. > > according to the porting guide[1], section "Update Checklist", it seems > to need REVISION. > > quote: > >> Each port update needs a package name bump. Otherwise, the update >> mechanism for binary packages won't work. Anything that affects the >> binary package implies a bump. This includes HOMEPAGE, MAINTAINER or >> description changes, changes to patches or build flags. If the >> upstream version has not changed, the package name bump is done by >> incrementing REVISION if already present, otherwise adding REVISION = >> 0 towards the top of the Makefile. > > I'm quite new to the game, please someone correct me if I'm wrong.
You're only changing a comment in the Makefile, this comment can't affect the contents of the resulting package. You don't need a REVISION bump. Regarding the actual license, LGPLv3+ looks correct, ok jca@ > [1] https://www.openbsd.org/faq/ports/guide.html -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
