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 D5C0F138010 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 07:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 625AFE0B3C; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 07:47:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74EA3E0B1F for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 07:47:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (87-205-60-160.adsl.inetia.pl [87.205.60.160]) (using SSLv3 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 787CA33BEC8; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 07:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 09:43:00 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: dilfridge@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Global useflags zeroconf and avahi Message-ID: <20130402094300.61361552@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <201304020043.32152.dilfridge@gentoo.org> References: <201304012359.03703.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <515A09EF.5000003@gentoo.org> <201304020043.32152.dilfridge@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.17; 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-SHA512; boundary="Sig_/Ld2vww2TZsTMOXa/7NGDZBf"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 51bd51fc-f27b-415d-9600-c187aac793c3 X-Archives-Hash: e0c122b91c518f230c30835a0c109674 --Sig_/Ld2vww2TZsTMOXa/7NGDZBf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 00:43:31 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Am Dienstag, 2. April 2013, 00:27:59 schrieb Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher N= guy=E1=BB=85n: > > > I would like to suggest unifying use-flag usage, and use "zeroconf" > > > anywhere. > >=20 > > Sounds good. Do you think the same should apply to non-mDNS/DNS-SD based > > zeroconf like UPnP/SSDP? >=20 > No idea to be honest... :| opinions? The flags should be practical. I have no use for DNS-SD and other magical junk, yet use UPnP/IGD for port forwarding. The flags should let me just enable just that without pulling all other possible variants I won't use. That said, USE=3Dupnp was cleaned up a while ago. I don't think it should be integrated with zeroconf. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/Ld2vww2TZsTMOXa/7NGDZBf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRWowMXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1RUJGMjBGOTk2RkIzQzIyQ0M2RkNBNDBC QUJGMUQ1RkY4QzgxMTBBAAoJELq/HV/4yBEKzPAQAI3MRd3rYzc2oCzrbC46Zaxa +Wnk5tONlbMXSpdCwvz/wbbmJCevW+1CHlVsMJ8Pay1do3X9WuEYeLZceUMiVK4z sKISNfPYuqnT068xCoYOuddKPpkmlyylqGwsKfTqRWDn+jmZe2qLN2CW1zyTg4uw Lu6+B4o0yTsPwk5XrnQ2Q6LA5Hf77Bm50/D8yAEyJOFCY9X0IhAdn5Y1/SmuCMey VNRbcygjbt8ivhbpzmJ8gIHKmAwa4HPbw040T45++AAV8DzMNKq4vBnXpflmxaHy Of+PEEX9wur0kJONNPUb6eoEl10Ey6gQIF0EbhgsW9vYdc29kr3ypPWpBgzwOyTm wyIgyGPjCQFv1iVR4m9cwF4l2u3TXibKeWqBwsv1IvttZkyg82t6rfOfQoqWV2+x IM2iHcQbNR1x40l13+Xm34/Wd+NMaReWd28CR7WhvRRuVsiPOcv3FTSYH9SLoHBM 9VfkvG+u35qyaN07yyQCNuZX3kvMy3ehX4BmF8514mX8brV1PS724oGK0TWYpq+p 2zFGMLfHGloySqLThveQTnsK/vix8NtAyDYaClnflJxMOlPDg2dYxXnGTE42bOVT BvzOFalzFVFqz65autCaxG9l5+RhGxkkDQ5mnoaqvBNI/BcELXqJf+swfVqyf8DZ 5IwllXkBP5uRTqYcMFgG =KuDv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Ld2vww2TZsTMOXa/7NGDZBf--