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 1EedsK-0004T1-Jt for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:32:21 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAMJVBQo024963; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:31:11 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAMJSE9u013079 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:28:15 GMT Received: from bmb24.med.uth.tmc.edu ([129.106.207.24] helo=localhost) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EedoM-00017Q-7S for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:28:14 +0000 Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:28:08 -0600 From: Grant Goodyear To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation Message-ID: <20051122192808.GE16984@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org 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> 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; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oj4kGyHlBMXGt3Le" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1132686363.27288.79.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 83514e49-9b2f-460a-8589-0986c4015ec6 X-Archives-Hash: c4230fe8bf378cd2abd64fe622e4720c --oj4kGyHlBMXGt3Le Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Tue Nov 22 2005, 01:06:03PM CST] > Who said that removing something isn't a part of the procedure to get an > identical build? Yeah, my phrasing was lousy (which I noted in another e-mail, but I doubt you had time to see it before replying to this one). >=20 > The point is that following the proper steps, one *can* get the exact > same output. This would include using --newuse and cleaning out unused > packages, along with any other maintenance items that would be required. That's fine with me. All I really want to do is ensure that we preserve our users' ability to tinker with system without making life too painful for them. Starting from a stage 1 it was obvious how to do such tinkering. I would argue that it's not quite as obvious how to do that when starting from a stage 3, so a bit of additional documentation on how to do that would be nice. If that were done, then I would have no complaints about the stage 1 and stage 2 tarballs going away altogether. *Shrug* -g2boojum- --=20 Grant Goodyear=09 Gentoo Developer g2boojum@gentoo.org http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 --oj4kGyHlBMXGt3Le Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDg3FIptxxUuD2W3YRAvAIAJsGl/hJ+rdPQlfpQwJxCMsyZZrl5gCfZoe1 Y4C4BcvF4un6EgbE9eNsPeM= =GepL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oj4kGyHlBMXGt3Le-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list