From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from mail2.powweb.com (mail2.powweb.com [64.63.125.223]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A735EAC381 for ; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 09:16:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: from gentoo.org (pool-151-204-10-160.delv.east.verizon.net [151.204.10.160]) by mail2.powweb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC9723A6E for ; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 07:16:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3CFA28B7.3010201@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2002 14:16:23 +0000 From: David Chamberlain Organization: Gentoo Linux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0rc1) Gecko/20020429 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Installer (2) [LARGE] References: <20020602122104.49479ABD9F@chiba.3jane.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: ce278799-e9c2-4285-9101-51df430597c5 X-Archives-Hash: 4e23269d5715ab2d4246c2db8007dc01 I have no problem with the idea of an installer. The more tools the better. On the other hand, a possible problem with Anaconda: I haven't used it, but I assume it's x86 only? If so, we can't use it on ppc, sparc etc. One of gentoo's greatest virtues is portability (look for more ports appearing over the next few months), and I would encourage anyone writing tools to bear this in mind. For a quick fix, anaconda may be fine (we'll just live without the installer on ppc), but is there any reason why, in the long term, the --buildpkg/--usepkg features of portage couldn't be leveraged in place of the rpms? A virtue of this is that portage itself could be tweaked to enhance the installer if necessary, since it's our tool, not RedHat's. Regards, David