On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 21:16 +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
> 22.11.2005, 20:57:15, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> 
> > The idea was to move out the stage1/stage2 docs to somewhere else.  Then
> > create some sort of "Advanced Installation Topics" guide or something, to
> > list out the replacement procedures for customizing a system from a stage3
> > tarball, then, eventually, drop the stage1 and stage2 tarballs.
> 
> Erm, did you read what solar wrote about hardened stages and why should stage1
> still stay?

I read it.  For one, I am speaking of the default stages for the
releases.  If the Hardened team decides that they would prefer to
continue to offer a stage1 tarball, I wouldn't have a problem with that.
While solar's reasoning applies fine to the Hardened releases, it
doesn't apply to the default x86 releases, as we release on multiple
sub-arches, which each have their proper CHOST settings.

> > "A stage3 tarball is an archive containing a minimal Gentoo environment,
> > suitable to continue the Gentoo installation using the instructions in
> > this manual. Previously, the Gentoo Handbook described the installation
> > using one of three stage tarballs. While Gentoo still offers stage1 and
> > stage2 tarballs, the official installation method uses the stage3
> > tarball. If you are interested in performing a Gentoo installation using
> > a stage1 or stage2 tarball, please read the Gentoo FAQ on How do I
> > Install Gentoo Using a Stage1 or Stage2 Tarball?"
> 
> That FAQ section has nothing in common with the original stage1 docs. Sorry,
> installing stage3 to remove all the use flags cruft subsequently, bootstrap and
> re-emerge the system and then ponder which packages are not needed any more
> (again, there's no reliable tool to remove unneeded stuff from system, I've
> already mentioned this once) - hmmm... :/

No.  That FAQ section is there to describe how to install from a stage1
or stage2 tarball and has nothing to do with a stage3 tarball, nor did I
ever say that it would.  I'm not sure I understand what you're getting
at here.

> And - once stages 1+2 are removed (as you are suggesting above), then I'll
> install the system only to build my own stage1 w/ catalyst, then reformat and
> start over with my own stage? Ah, that makes live sooo much easier ;p

You would be more than welcome to, but you would be wasting your time.
I quite personally could care less if you wish to go through this
process or not.  The whole point here is in what we want to support.

> > Really, everybody is just up in arms over a knee-jerk reaction to not
> > reading carefully.  What it boils down to is either not knowing the
> > facts, or trolling/flaming.
> 
> Why exactly is evaporating stage1 an ultimate goal here (as it seems to me?).

It's usefulness is far outweighed by the problems it causes, and it is
really no longer necessary, nor has it been for over a year now.

> So don't support it, but why it should not exist?

I'll explain this just once.  If we release it, we are expected to
support it.  There are *tons* of examples of things we won't do because
we don't want the headache of supporting it.  Why should this be any
different?

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