From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Poi8d-0005KZ-TF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 20:01:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 976DBE0C09; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 20:01:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B911E0BEF for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 20:00:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.201] (23.151.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es [87.222.151.23]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE7F21B403E; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 20:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] libgphoto2-2.4.10 news item From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: gnome In-Reply-To: <20110213193440.475debea@googlemail.com> References: <1297616621.21312.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20110213170905.569595d6@googlemail.com> <1297625483.7535.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20110213193440.475debea@googlemail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-iFNNn4EkShfhamZCtJAe" Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 21:00:31 +0100 Message-ID: <1297627231.7535.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: cf3d5d791074eac5156ec917e5e96a6e --=-iFNNn4EkShfhamZCtJAe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 19:34 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 20:31:23 +0100 > Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Wouldn't be any shorter way to build all CAMERAS? We don't want to > > default to enabling all, with the new way of handling this, if CAMERAS > > is not set or is empty, nothing will be built but, if CAMERAS=3D"*" > > shouldn't be used, what should we use instead of having to manually > > add all of them to make.conf (from a user point of view) >=20 > Why not specify all the CAMERAS you know about as being on by default in > the profile? Users who care enough can override this with an explicit > subset. >=20 If rest of gnome team agrees, I think we could go with, but I still fail to see what is the "technical" problem on allowing CAMERAS=3D"*" to be used :-| --=-iFNNn4EkShfhamZCtJAe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk1YOF8ACgkQCaWpQKGI+9SiIACfXSbG6xAbL6TOBylRPeR+Hf/e c3wAnA6BeWJSjUayGGrAW/+Np4qaVzAK =eOSD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-iFNNn4EkShfhamZCtJAe--