Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>> This is one of the main reasons I'd like to propose a replacement for
>> PORTREVISION/PORTEPOCH that can more easily be set within an optional
>> part of the Makefile.
> While having certain deficiencies, PORTREVISION/PORTEPOCH had worked
> pretty well for a long time, yet being simple enough to not get in the
> way. Will your alternative give more than it will take from settled way
> of doing things?
I already posted briefly on the bash thread about my idea, but the
answer to your question is yes. I'm not proposing taking anything
away, but I am proposing something that will eliminate the need for
users to needlessly recompile ports that are already up to date for
them based on the options they actually HAVE chosen.