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 1SQON3-0001P8-S7 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 04 May 2012 19:40:54 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9BE66E07B5; Fri, 4 May 2012 19:40:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 839AEE0738 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 19:39:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.253.112] (64-60-118-178.static-ip.telepacific.net [64.60.118.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: lu_zero) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 03CBA1B4051 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 19:39:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FA4307C.4090804@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:40 -0700 From: Luca Barbato User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120413 Thunderbird/11.0.1 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Chromium bundled code References: <4F9E44D0.70002@linx.net> <4F9E47AF.9080201@gentoo.org> <201204301211.05705.vapier@gentoo.org> <4FA2512E.7030806@gentoo.org> <20120503213930.GA5562@waltdnes.org> <4FA419F8.8080907@gentoo.org> <4FA421F3.9070100@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4FA421F3.9070100@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: b39a60f7-0664-4a87-98e8-30fa8e57a4ac X-Archives-Hash: 5ad82468c7a5b908402cf7708bd9066d -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/05/12 11:37, "Pawe=C5=82 Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 5/4/12 8:21 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> My 2 cents: The Chromium project really doesn't have any motivation to >> make it optional since their end product is Google Chrome and they >> target a given version of Ubuntu. I think a patch to make them >> optional might be accepted, but it probably isn't going to happen >> otherwise. >=20 > Another point is that too many USE flags for such a big and complex > package as www-client/chromium would make testing much much harder, and > create many configurations upstream would not support. I'll check with upstream if that would be a huge problem for them, we have 6 useflags and we'd bump them to 8. Firefox has twice of them. If nobody else wants to I could have a look and see how hard is to make that nicer for our non-udev/non-dbus users on linux. lu - --=20 Luca Barbato Gentoo/linux http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk+kMHwACgkQ6Ex4woTpDjTTAgCfXtMJFJjB5ZH08u0Nb7yKmkqv /GwAoNejWgUcHaMWnD6e8Bgr/+V/cYDA =3DCCQe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----