From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FB51138010 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 08:20:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BBECFE0655; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 08:19:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53F6E05ED for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 08:19:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (77-254-69-147.adsl.inetia.pl [77.254.69.147]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C50CE33CB84; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 08:19:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:19:06 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: flameeyes@flameeyes.eu Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] making USE=upnp a global flag Message-ID: <20120919101906.48bb3479@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <505909F1.6060405@flameeyes.eu> References: <20120908202948.1ad384ce@pomiocik.lan> <1347922516.32391.8.camel@kanae> <20120918100551.65b1e254@pomiocik.lan> <1348012244.28505.2.camel@kanae> <505909F1.6060405@flameeyes.eu> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.12; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_//uc_n0bPfrXm+TZaHa8c5IX"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 1e0a927a-81e3-4454-ba84-2e0bf4a21faf X-Archives-Hash: c411b1a6e4c11bc4d5a4358a2612f2f6 --Sig_//uc_n0bPfrXm+TZaHa8c5IX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 16:55:29 -0700 Diego Elio Petten=C3=B2 wrote: > On 18/09/2012 16:50, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > > Let me just say that as a user, concerning this technology > > aggregate, I really don't care, it has to "just work" :). Now if > > you gather enough momentum to split this flag and make other people > > on this list agree with you, I'll be just fine with it :) >=20 > I'd be positive to splitting them. Especially because for instance in > an office you might care about port forwarding but won't care about > DLNA. >=20 > Speaking of which, renaming (where applicable) upnp to dlna might be > more user friendly since usually you have the feature _advertised_ as > DLNA, not as UPnP! Just to make it clear: - USE=3Dupnp for upnp-igd or nat-pmp, - USE=3Ddlna for the video magic and so on. Do I understand correctly? --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_//uc_n0bPfrXm+TZaHa8c5IX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAlBZf/oACgkQfXuS5UK5QB13DAP/eyHcvE9haZojuo9dl7JgLTfG OAPCT6njc5eWCKShJJcqnGr87yaVJaLWqDvNTuuuePfd8xO6Kjx72FRT/d0tpqlk D6kAERzviyrywGHBZMjehUlFr/sQdprYI56K+oHIO8Q56Bbi43mh1SrnQvT2SQm4 e2FPaKQI2w4dbb0woy0= =+sW/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//uc_n0bPfrXm+TZaHa8c5IX--