On 13 Jul 2017, at 21:50, db <iams...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13 Jul 2017, at 18:08, Joshua Root <j...@macports.org> wrote:
>> Fixed in master:
> I understand that there's no additional name field for subports in the
> registry and that they have the same hash. But I don't get how the additional
> checking you introduced would prevent this from happening (I cannot speak the
> details of tcl though). Neither I understand how only portfiles of these 15
> out of ~130 ports that have subports/are subports were left in the registry.
> Only thing that widly comes to mind — I haven't modified their portfiles
> locally, but AFAIR of dependents on these while interrupting vim's editing
> process, but again that would have meant leaving orphaned dirs for other
> ports too.
Can I delete those rows safely?