port upgrade outdated order

[Daniel J. Luke]

> On Mar 4, 2015, at 12:39 PM, Chris Jones <jonesc at hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Let me clarify: do all ports register all files that are somehow related (not necessarily installed; possibly created afterwards, etc). This came up when we discussed using the archive tarballs to reinstall a port, or to recreate those tarballs from the currently installed stuff, and I remember there was good reason that ports can have associated files that are not registered.
>> I cannot come up with a good example right now, but I expect that there might be build systems (or portfiles) that use such files one way or another.
> 
> If you can come up with an example, I would again personally classify that as a bug in the port that should be fixed. *anything* a port installs should be installed during the destroot phase, and thus be properly registered. If there are ports that side-step this, then those ports are at fault.

the exception is probably conf files.

--
Daniel J. Luke
dluke at us.ntt.net