about keeping a checksums table in a separate file

[Brandon Allbery]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:11 PM, René J.V. <rjvbertin at gmail.com> wrote:

> - letting `port checksum` update the checksums removes much of the
> interest of verifying checksums ("the checksum doesn't match, do you want
> to update it?")


I would expect that you would need an option to enable updating, and get
the current behavior without.

Granting your other point, I still can't help but think that 60+ subports
is Doing It Wrong somewhere along the way. Perhaps KF5 should be a
PortGroup instead?

-- 
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
allbery.b at gmail.com                                  ballbery at sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20160201/95d2d578/attachment.html>