On Thu Aug 02, 2018 at 05:36:13PM +0200, Jan Klemkow wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > I also worked on an cmark port. I took your tar ball and fixed all > comments Stuart pointed out. Just, the MAINTAINER field is still unset, > But, a portscheck run does not require this field. > > I replaced the manual DISTFILE and MASTER_SITE handling by the GH_* > variables, moved it to category "textproc" and correct some spacing.
That wasn't the way to go and the spacing was fine -- trust me or use vim. Please see my traball. > > Hopefully that helps you. I also need this tool for a private project > of mine. Would you like to take MAINTAINER? > > bye, > Jan > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 10:41:30AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2018/08/02 11:03, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > > > please find attached a small dependency for the upcoming > > > multimedia/mkvtoolnix update. All tests are passed on amd64. > > > > > > pkg_info: > > > Information for inst:cmark-0.28.3 > > > > > > Comment: > > > CommonMark parsing and rendering library and program in C > > > > > > Required by: > > > mkvtoolnix-25.0.0-no_x11 > > > > > > Description: > > > cmark is the C reference implementation of CommonMark, a rationalized > > > version > > > of Markdown syntax with a spec. > > > > > > Maintainer: The OpenBSD ports mailing-list <ports@openbsd.org> > > > > > > WWW: https://commonmark.org/ > > > > > > Ok? Comments? > > > > textproc or converters would seem better than devel? > > Fixed. Yes, I'm fine with textproc makes more sense then devel. > > > $ cat distinfo > > SHA256 (0.28.3.tar.gz) = rMmGhdPBtRX/eHrHyZQYja2vKKLXAMEMEiHaQZm64fw= > > SIZE (0.28.3.tar.gz) = 229391 > > > > Please rename that to something sensible via the DISTFILES=...{...} > > mechanism. > > This is also fixed. All comments packed in the new tarball.
cmark-0.28.3p0.tar.gz
Description: Binary data
