<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:11 PM, René J.V. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rjvbertin@gmail.com" target="_blank">rjvbertin@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">- 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?")</blockquote></div><br>I would expect that you would need an option to enable updating, and get the current behavior without.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">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?<br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates</div><div><a href="mailto:allbery.b@gmail.com" target="_blank">allbery.b@gmail.com</a> <a href="mailto:ballbery@sinenomine.net" target="_blank">ballbery@sinenomine.net</a></div><div>unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad <a href="http://sinenomine.net" target="_blank">http://sinenomine.net</a></div></div></div>
</div></div>