Keeping track of automatically installed dependency-only ports

[Robert Huff]

Jeremie Le Hen writes:

>  My request is more subtle, I think.

	<example deleted>
	To quote the old television show: "Insufficient data, Captain."
	I don't recall _any_ piece of port management software
recording, or even understanding, the difference between a port
"installed automatically" and one "installed manually".  (Could be
wrong here.)
	If this is so, then one /might/ be able write code to track
this ... somehow.  My off-the-cuff analysis is any solution will
involve a) manual intervention while manually installing ports
and/or b) increased complexity in the code.
	In view of the recent thread (on current@ ??) in which many
people were willing to trade /decreased/ complexity for faster
execution time, I'd say you have a long way to go before this gets
committed.  (A carefully considered exposition of what the problem
is, why it's a problem for many people, and how a proposed solution
might work, submitted here, would be a good start.)


					Robet Huff