[PATCH] openssl: correct license comment

[Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>]

The comment here stated that openssl is dual-licensed, but that would
mean that either of the two licenses could be used which is *not* the
case [1]. However LICENSE = "openssl" *is* correct because in OE that
maps to a generic license file which includes both licenses, which
makes sense because there isn't really any such thing as OpenSSL that
would be covered by the "OpenSSL license" and not the "SSLeay license".
Correct the comment to avoid any confusion.

[1] https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html

Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
---
 meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1.bb | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1.bb b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1.bb
index 03518586877..0d80aba64d7 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1.bb
@@ -4,7 +4,8 @@ HOMEPAGE = "http://www.openssl.org/"
 BUGTRACKER = "http://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html"
 SECTION = "libs/network"
 
-# "openssl | SSLeay" dual license
+# "openssl" here actually means both OpenSSL and SSLeay licenses apply
+# (see meta/files/common-licenses/OpenSSL to which "openssl" is SPDXLICENSEMAPped)
 LICENSE = "openssl"
 LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE;md5=d57d511030c9d66ef5f5966bee5a7eff"
 
-- 
2.17.2