[gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[Hanford_Smith, Jason]

Code Listing 40

The following two lines have errors:

splashimage=(hd0,0)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz

should be

splashimage=(hd0,0)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz


and

kernel /boot/bzImage root=/dev/hda3

should be

kernel /bzImage root=/dev/hda3


Reason: Both file references are relative to (hd0,0) which is already /boot


--Jason

Re: [gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[Doug Goldstein]

Works perfectly fine the doc way and I think you wanted the splashimage to be 
without the /boot but you didn't type that. However I like it the doc way 
with /boot in there. Makes it a bit more clear to look at.

-Doug

On Friday 14 June 2002 03:21 pm, Hanford_Smith, Jason wrote:
> Code Listing 40
>
> The following two lines have errors:
>
> splashimage=(hd0,0)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz
>
> should be
>
> splashimage=(hd0,0)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz
>
>
> and
>
> kernel /boot/bzImage root=/dev/hda3
>
> should be
>
> kernel /bzImage root=/dev/hda3
>
>
> Reason: Both file references are relative to (hd0,0) which is already /boot
>
>
> --Jason
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[Colin Morey]

On Fri, 2002-06-14 at 20:52, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Works perfectly fine the doc way and I think you wanted the splashimage to be 
> without the /boot but you didn't type that. However I like it the doc way 
> with /boot in there. Makes it a bit more clear to look at.
> 
indeed, the docs way is clearer imho, and if you look closely, there is
a symlink in /boot pointing back to /boot (/boot/boot-> /boot) it's a
hack, but it's a clean one, and one that makes a lot of sense.(other
wise many people could easily get confused.
> -Doug
> 
> On Friday 14 June 2002 03:21 pm, Hanford_Smith, Jason wrote:
> > Code Listing 40
> >
> > The following two lines have errors:
> >
> > splashimage=(hd0,0)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz
> >
> > should be
> >
> > splashimage=(hd0,0)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz
> >
> >
> > and
> >
> > kernel /boot/bzImage root=/dev/hda3
> >
> > should be
> >
> > kernel /bzImage root=/dev/hda3
> >
> >
> > Reason: Both file references are relative to (hd0,0) which is already /boot
> >
> >
> > --Jason
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 

Re: [gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[orange-pc.ces.clemson.edu]

> Reason: Both file references are relative to (hd0,0) which is already /boot

By having the sym-link, though, the line also works if somebody ignores
the install doc and decides not to have a separate /boot partition.

-g2boojum-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[Mario Witt]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin Morey" <peitolm@gentoo.org>
To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

<SNIP>

> indeed, the docs way is clearer imho, and if you look closely, there is
> a symlink in /boot pointing back to /boot (/boot/boot-> /boot) it's a
> hack, but it's a clean one, and one that makes a lot of sense.(other
> wise many people could easily get confused.
> > -Doug

< SNIP >

Hmmm... I thought this was a distro for people who KNOW what they're doing
;-)
Maybe, instead of creating such a symlink, there could be a short mention in
the docs about the path to the files being relative to /boot.
There are so many things newbies (of which I am one) have to learn the hard
way that this one, in comparison, is very minor.

- Mario

Re: [gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[orange-pc.ces.clemson.edu]

> Hmmm... I thought this was a distro for people who KNOW what they're doing
> ;-)
> Maybe, instead of creating such a symlink, there could be a short mention in
> the docs about the path to the files being relative to /boot.
> There are so many things newbies (of which I am one) have to learn the hard
> way that this one, in comparison, is very minor.

Why?  I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve.  By having the
boot --> . symbolic link we have an elegant solution that works for
everybody, and doesn't hurt anybody.  If the user has a separate /boot
partition and doesn't want to have grub point to (hd,x)/boot, then
that's fine.  That user can even delete the symlink.

There was a time when we did not have that symbolic link.  I know that
I got very tired of the subsequent "Hey, my computer won't boot."  "Did
you use a separate /boot partition like it says in the docs?" 
rounds that then occurred several times per week.  So, Daniel Robbins
came up with a transparent solution that works for everybody.

Finally, I would like to clear up a common misconception.  Gentoo Linux
is, indeed, "geared towards Linux power users".  My personal opinion,
though,  is that
it is unrealistic to expect even power users to understand 
everything that goes into a Linux distribution, so saying that Gentoo
is "a distro for people who KNOW what they're doing" seems like
a bit much.  (In fact, many people seem to come to Gentoo precisely
so that they can learn more about Linux without the drudgery required
with installing an LFS distro.)  I prefer to say
that Gentoo Linux is a distro for people who want flexibility.  Anything
we can do to make it easier for the user that does _not_ unduly impact
flexibility is something we should do, and most, if not all, of our
developers instinctively seem to understand that notion.  Of course,
we don't always succeed, but we do try.

The opinions expressed above are, of course, my own.  Daniel Robbins
and the other developers may not agree.

-g2boojum-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Build Doc Error

[Ryan Phillips]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1280 bytes --]

On 15 Jun 2002 10:06:28 -0400
"orange-pc.ces.clemson.edu" <grant@grantgoodyear.org> wrote:
> Finally, I would like to clear up a common misconception.  Gentoo Linux
> is, indeed, "geared towards Linux power users".  My personal opinion,
> though,  is that
> it is unrealistic to expect even power users to understand 
> everything that goes into a Linux distribution, so saying that Gentoo
> is "a distro for people who KNOW what they're doing" seems like
> a bit much.  (In fact, many people seem to come to Gentoo precisely
> so that they can learn more about Linux without the drudgery required

well said g2boojum.  

We do try to make things easier for the users, but linux
is a rapidly changing operating system and has an infinite number of 
configuration options.  Not all of us _know_ what we are doing, we just
sit down and try to solve the problem.  We don't have to wait for Microsoft and
a patch -- we create our own.  Gentoo Linux has many developers, including all
the users that submit bug reports, and all the users that submit new ebuilds, and
all those that submit patches.  We are in-debt to all of those individuals, because
they do exactly what we do: debug the problems and add features/ideas to better
the operating system.

Just my opinion.

Regards,
Ryan

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 481 bytes --]