From owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 2 15:31:40 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: multimedia@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30A281065673; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 15:31:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from varga@stonehenge.sk) Received: from s1.active.sk (ns.active.sk [217.67.25.9]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDBBB8FC13; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 15:31:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.active.sk [127.0.0.1]) by s1.active.sk (Postfix) with ESMTP id A22195C31B; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 16:20:14 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at active.sk Received: from s1.active.sk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.active.sk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fANuZ7U94yxR; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 16:19:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.0.101.2] (254.166.broadband10.iol.cz [90.177.166.254]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by s1.active.sk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C0445C2D9; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 16:18:18 +0100 (CET) From: Michal Varga To: Andriy Gapon In-Reply-To: <1299078805.52738.15.camel@xenon> References: <4D6E558B.5090706@freebsd.org> <1299078805.52738.15.camel@xenon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Organization: Stonehenge Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 16:18:45 +0100 Message-ID: <1299079125.52738.16.camel@xenon> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: gnome@freebsd.org, multimedia@freebsd.org, mkbosmans@gmail.com Subject: Re: pulseaudio: module.c: module-detect is deprecated: Please use module-udev-detect instead of module-detect! X-BeenThere: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Multimedia discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 15:31:40 -0000 On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 16:13 +0100, Michal Varga wrote: > So instead of fixing things like these in ports, I'd say the issue > should be reported/fix submitted to upstream, it's pretty much possible > that they don't even know that there are systems that don't run evdev > (note that I don't mean it offensively, more like speaking generally > from experience, it simply happens). > Eh, I meant udev of course, I guess that's enough coffee for me today. m. -- Michal Varga, Stonehenge