| 1 |
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 20.04.2016 kell 22:18, kirjutas Mart Raudsepp: |
| 2 |
> Basically the only real point I have is that anything kernel_* to |
| 3 |
> control this probably doesn't make sense. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Oh, just to clarify and avoid misunderstanding: |
| 7 |
I did not intend to ack the changes to gdk-pixbuf and gtk+ with my |
| 8 |
message, even if the flag name is changed. |
| 9 |
It sounds to me like we have some refactoring to do in those ebuilds |
| 10 |
together with aqua in mind as well, once we have agreed on the future |
| 11 |
global USE flag name. |
| 12 |
I also vote 'no' to the profiles changes, because we don't have 6+ |
| 13 |
packages with the flag yet to make it global use flag quite yet (though |
| 14 |
it would make sense once we do, and in essence it is a global one that |
| 15 |
needs masking in other profiles, etc - fiddly with local use flag). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Once this thread has concluded on a naming, I'm sure we can have a |
| 18 |
productive gtk/gdk-pixbuf review via IRC :) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Mart |
Archives