Looks good (and you don't need further approval from portmgr@, @salvadore). In fact, I was going to make that same change. :-)

Hi Lorenzo,

Like it! Maybe share this with gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org before adding it here to see what feedback the GCC folks may have (but that's just a suggestion, not required).

fluffy@ approved this on behalf of desktop in https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=254322#c3 .

Thank you for thinking of our users impacted negatively, Lorenzo.

In D25296#809250, @salvadore wrote:

I have not received any reply to my mail and more than a month has passed. I abandon the revision.

In D35416#803163, @salvadore wrote:

I confirm that %%SQLITE%% is still needed and I have put it back.

Approved with PORTREVISION bump added. (Technically that bump could be made conditional on i386, but that kind of conditional has proven to be a maintenance issue that's probably not worth the hassle, so I'd do it unconditionally.)

In D35361#801714, @salvadore wrote:

I was unsure about bumping PORTREVISION or not. I choosed not to do it because:

• with the actual default version of GCC (10) the port fully supports SSL, even on i386;

Thank you for the review, @thierry!

Lorenzo, I just realized this one's still open. What next steps would you like to take?

In D35321#800838, @bcran wrote:

I'll try and contact someone on IRC or Slack if there's a next time. Not being a ports committer I can't commit fixes directly.

Hi Rebecca, changes like this don't need review. It's best to commit them as quickly as possible since otherwise make index is broken.