From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Eefrb-0003MO-UF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:39:44 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAMLd1CS029570; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:39:01 GMT Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz (gw.top-hosting.cz [81.0.254.91]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAMLahPm030681 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:36:43 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D08A9A5C89 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:36:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.top-hosting.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 31736-03-16 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:36:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from NOTORCOMP (21.217.broadband4.iol.cz [85.71.217.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 590989A65A7 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:36:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:36:36 +0100 From: Jakub Moc X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1856828087.20051122223636@gentoo.org> To: Chris Gianelloni Subject: Re[4]: [gentoo-dev] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation In-Reply-To: <1132693131.27288.102.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> References: <20051122144745.GR12982@mail.lieber.org> <438330E1.2000804@gentoo.org> <1132672527.27288.21.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <20051122180349.GC16984@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <1132686363.27288.79.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <20051122192808.GE16984@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <1132689436.27288.91.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <977302213.20051122211620@gentoo.org> <1132693131.27288.102.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="----------11B2B3A2BC8EB08" X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.3.3 (20050822) at top-hosting.cz X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.39 tagged_above=-999 required=6 tests=[AWL=0.011, SPF_NEUTRAL=1.379] X-Spam-Score: 1.39 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archives-Salt: c35c6896-a2e7-4646-a17b-2c209af8d3ed X-Archives-Hash: 3e13cd81e2b97a20b2059361d8a2046a ------------11B2B3A2BC8EB08 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0D=0A22.11.2005, 21:58:50, Chris Gianelloni wrote: >> That FAQ section has nothing in common with the original stage1 docs. So= rry, >> installing stage3 to remove all the use flags cruft subsequently, bootst= rap >> and re-emerge the system and then ponder which packages are not needed a= ny >> more (again, there's no reliable tool to remove unneeded stuff from syst= em, >> 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. Uhm, do I really need to quote it here? "How do I Install Gentoo Using a Stage1 or Stage2 Tarball? ... However, Gentoo still provides stage1 and stage2 tarballs. This is for development purposes (the Release Engineering team starts from a stage1 tar= ball to obtain a stage3) but shouldn't be used by users: a stage3 tarball can ve= ry well be used to bootstrap the system." Sorry, but that does not answer the original FAQ question at all... The above does not describe a stage1 install, but a workaround procedure yo= u've invented because of your strong dislike of stage1 install. However much you say the result is the same, it's not. E.g. - how exactly I get rid of those unneeded packages once I've changed the use flags, bootstrapped and rebuilt= the system? Honestly, stage3 is something I don't find useful for a server inst= all because the default use flags are aimed at desktop systems. Sure, I can use hardened stage3, compiled for i386 and enjoy the Debian feeling. ;p > The whole point here is in what we want to support. So don't support it, but let it exist! >> 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. Uhm, I've seen quite a couple of examples in this debate why it is still necessary and useful. >> 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? sigh... You are not required to support it - exactly like you are not expec= ted or required to support gcc-4 and gcc-4.1 and you can mark any bugs about it= as INVALID (happens every day, quite frankly). --=20 jakub ------------11B2B3A2BC8EB08 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32) iD8DBQFDg49khxfV/c66PZ4RAvKvAJ497B9Bc/oFPfKsUoOplZEW+5x1HgCeMWYT 6TipyL1iuoghGPqRfu850OY= =51xl -----END PGP MESSAGE----- ------------11B2B3A2BC8EB08-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list