use colortype instead of config

use colortype instead of config

patch from issue 172063004

BUG=skia:
R=scroggo@google.com

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/skia/source/detail?r=13520

[scroggo, 2014-02-20 15:46:51]

On 2014/02/20 15:36:42, reed1 wrote:

LGTM

For the future, when patching from another issue and making changes, it's
helpful to the reviewers to do an upload which is identical to the old issue,
then make changes, then do another upload. That way we can see how this code
differs from the original code (which we've already reviewed).

[reed1, 2014-02-20 16:55:06]

On 2014/02/20 15:46:51, scroggo wrote:
> On 2014/02/20 15:36:42, reed1 wrote:
> 
> LGTM
> 
> For the future, when patching from another issue and making changes, it's
> helpful to the reviewers to do an upload which is identical to the old issue,
> then make changes, then do another upload. That way we can see how this code
> differs from the original code (which we've already reviewed).

Absolutely! I tried very hard to do that, but the original issue was owned by an
account that I couldn't re-access here at work. I do apologize for losing the
relative diff.

[reed1, 2014-02-20 16:56:14]

The CQ bit was checked by reed@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-20 16:56:20]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/reed@google.com/173893002/1

[reed1, 2014-02-20 16:59:48]

On 2014/02/20 16:55:06, reed1 wrote:
> On 2014/02/20 15:46:51, scroggo wrote:
> > On 2014/02/20 15:36:42, reed1 wrote:
> > 
> > LGTM
> > 
> > For the future, when patching from another issue and making changes, it's
> > helpful to the reviewers to do an upload which is identical to the old
issue,
> > then make changes, then do another upload. That way we can see how this code
> > differs from the original code (which we've already reviewed).
> 
> Absolutely! I tried very hard to do that, but the original issue was owned by
an
> account that I couldn't re-access here at work. I do apologize for losing the
> relative diff.

Doh -- now I understand what you're asking for. YES -- I should have done that
this time, and I will from now on.

[reed1, 2014-02-20 20:54:19]

The CQ bit was unchecked by reed@google.com

[reed1, 2014-02-20 20:55:50]

Committed patchset #1 manually as r13520 (presubmit successful).