Re: [gentoo-dev] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation

[Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1335 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:29 -0500, solar wrote:
> > Now, on the topic of the tarballs.
> > 
> > Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2
> > tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball.
> 
> Stage1: Changing CHOST= and run ./bootstrap.sh 
> (well you can do it but it's dumb)

Right.  You can do it.

> Stage3: has full cxx/berkdb/ssl/pam/libwrap and all the cruft pulled in
> from having use flags enabled thats not easy to get rid of otherwise.

You can accomplish this, too.  Maybe we could even use that nice little
"scripts" directory in the portage tree to write a script to assist in
performing this.  I'm sure it would be less error-prone than what we
have now with the broken QA procedures allowing things to go into
system, or system-depended packages, that pulls in all kinds of useless
crap.

> I don't care what you do with the docs, but the stages 1, 3 need to 
> stay. stage2 has always been a bonus stage more or less added into the 
> mix cuz it's a byproduct of stage building (pre catalyst days).

Removing the stage1 and stage2 instructions from the Handbook has
already reduced the number of errors being reported by new users to me.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]