[gentoo-installer] remove

[gentoo-installer] remove

[Wesley Frazier]

remove
-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] remove

[Simon Stelling]

Wesley Frazier wrote:
> remove

you should send a void mail to gentoo-installer-unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org
-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[John Walsh]

Ok, but will the CD still ahve everything it had before, or will you be removing stuff to make 
room for X and all of that? If so, as I suspect, what will be taken out? Is there a place where 
people can look at what will be removed and maybe vote on what needs to stay?

Thanks,
Gabriel

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Gaffney" <agaffney@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:20:19 -0500

> 
> John Walsh wrote:
> > But I like the non-X liveCD (not the minimal, the Universal), everybody has X
> > livecd's and the simplicity and power of the current livecd is unmatched.
> > Is there no way of keeping the same Universal LiveCD as is now 
> > for those users that
> > prefer it? I mean, when a system is down, there is no need to 
> > start X and have open-office and x-chat, xine, mplayer, xmms, etc 
> > on the CD, but as many tools as possible, like it is now to get 
> > it back up.
> 
> The universal basically is the minimal with some extras:
> 
> universal == minimal + stages + portage snapshot
> 
> You can easily bypass X on the X-LiveCD by passing 'nox' on the 
> kernel commandline.
> 
> -- Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
> Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project
> 
> -- gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list


-- 
_______________________________________________
Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org
This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.

Powered by Outblaze

-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Andrew Gaffney]

John Walsh wrote:
> Ok, but will the CD still ahve everything it had before, or will you be removing stuff to make 
> room for X and all of that? If so, as I suspect, what will be taken out? Is there a place where 
> people can look at what will be removed and maybe vote on what needs to stay?

Everything that was on the universal will be on the X-LiveCD with the exception 
of stages. Instead, the installer can build a stage3 on-the-fly from the 
packages on the LiveCD itself. While this is currently much slower than using a 
stage3 tarball, we're working on speeding it up. And no, we won't put a stage3 
tarball back on the LiveCD. There simply isn't the room. We had a hard enough 
time fitting the portage snapshot on there while still keeping most (no KDE) of 
the standard GRP set.

-- 
Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project

-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2156 bytes --]

On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 02:28 +0800, John Walsh wrote:
> Ok, but will the CD still ahve everything it had before, or will you be removing stuff to make 
> room for X and all of that? If so, as I suspect, what will be taken out? Is there a place where 
> people can look at what will be removed and maybe vote on what needs to stay?

Nothing is taken out.  The Universal CD is just the Minimal CD, as far
as functionality is concerned.  This will be a more functional CD.  As
for voting, this isn't Survivor.  You don't get to vote anyone off the
island.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrew Gaffney" <agaffney@gentoo.org>
> To: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:20:19 -0500
> 
> > 
> > John Walsh wrote:
> > > But I like the non-X liveCD (not the minimal, the Universal), everybody has X
> > > livecd's and the simplicity and power of the current livecd is unmatched.
> > > Is there no way of keeping the same Universal LiveCD as is now 
> > > for those users that
> > > prefer it? I mean, when a system is down, there is no need to 
> > > start X and have open-office and x-chat, xine, mplayer, xmms, etc 
> > > on the CD, but as many tools as possible, like it is now to get 
> > > it back up.
> > 
> > The universal basically is the minimal with some extras:
> > 
> > universal == minimal + stages + portage snapshot
> > 
> > You can easily bypass X on the X-LiveCD by passing 'nox' on the 
> > kernel commandline.
> > 
> > -- Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
> > Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project
> > 
> > -- gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org
> This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.
> 
> Powered by Outblaze
> 
-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Revrend Oddball]

im actually fiddling with it now. so far i have seen nothing missing at all,
and it has included not just x but a number of applications.

It is very much a full linux installation with office and internet basics all
running. much like gentoo deciding to show up knoppix for their install cd. 

i think this is a great ide agiving you a full workstation that you can deal
with even if it doesnt have "EVERYTHNING" you even need. it has enough to keep
you functional. while you build your main system or rebuild your main system.

very nicely done devteam very nice.

although a little bit of prettyness would be on the oputput tab to add some
scrollbars. took me a few min to realis i could just click in the box and roam
about with my keyboard to watch what its doing.

--- John Walsh <high@linuxmail.org> wrote:

> Ok, but will the CD still ahve everything it had before, or will you be
> removing stuff to make 
> room for X and all of that? If so, as I suspect, what will be taken out? Is
> there a place where 
> people can look at what will be removed and maybe vote on what needs to stay?
> 
> Thanks,
> Gabriel
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrew Gaffney" <agaffney@gentoo.org>
> To: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation
> method, what about later?
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:20:19 -0500
> 
> > 
> > John Walsh wrote:
> > > But I like the non-X liveCD (not the minimal, the Universal), everybody
> has X
> > > livecd's and the simplicity and power of the current livecd is unmatched.
> > > Is there no way of keeping the same Universal LiveCD as is now 
> > > for those users that
> > > prefer it? I mean, when a system is down, there is no need to 
> > > start X and have open-office and x-chat, xine, mplayer, xmms, etc 
> > > on the CD, but as many tools as possible, like it is now to get 
> > > it back up.
> > 
> > The universal basically is the minimal with some extras:
> > 
> > universal == minimal + stages + portage snapshot
> > 
> > You can easily bypass X on the X-LiveCD by passing 'nox' on the 
> > kernel commandline.
> > 
> > -- Andrew Gaffney                           
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
> > Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project
> > 
> > -- gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org
> This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.
> 
> Powered by Outblaze
> 
> -- 
> gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 



Truly great madness can not be achieved without significant intelligence.
        
        -- Henrik Tikkanen      

                Stephen Partington
                


	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com
-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 587 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 11:55 -0700, Revrend Oddball wrote:
> very nicely done devteam very nice.

Thanks.  The LiveCD is actually done entirely by me, except for the
installer itself, of course.

> although a little bit of prettyness would be on the oputput tab to add some
> scrollbars. took me a few min to realis i could just click in the box and roam
> about with my keyboard to watch what its doing.

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109875

;]

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1272 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 02:28 +0800, John Walsh wrote:
> > Ok, but will the CD still ahve everything it had before, or will you be
> removing stuff to make
> > room for X and all of that? If so, as I suspect, what will be taken out?
> Is there a place where
> > people can look at what will be removed and maybe vote on what needs to
> stay?
>
> Nothing is taken out. The Universal CD is just the Minimal CD, as far
> as functionality is concerned. This will be a more functional CD. As
> for voting, this isn't Survivor. You don't get to vote anyone off the
> island.
>

Aww... come on... I wanna vote somebody off the island.

Anyhow I think the minimal and the installer cd are the way to go. Perhaps
if you just also release the source files you use to build the iso (I don't
know what this would be, perhaps the catalyst file?) then people who
desperately want to put together a KDE livecd or something like that could
do it themselves.

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1640 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Mike Rosset]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1560 bytes --]

I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris wont
release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list releng, more
then likely

On 10/20/05, Michael Crute <mcrute@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 02:28 +0800, John Walsh wrote:
> > > Ok, but will the CD still ahve everything it had before, or will you
> > be removing stuff to make
> > > room for X and all of that? If so, as I suspect, what will be taken
> > out? Is there a place where
> > > people can look at what will be removed and maybe vote on what needs
> > to stay?
> >
> > Nothing is taken out. The Universal CD is just the Minimal CD, as far
> > as functionality is concerned. This will be a more functional CD. As
> > for voting, this isn't Survivor. You don't get to vote anyone off the
> > island.
> >
>
> Aww... come on... I wanna vote somebody off the island.
>
> Anyhow I think the minimal and the installer cd are the way to go. Perhaps
> if you just also release the source files you use to build the iso (I don't
> know what this would be, perhaps the catalyst file?) then people who
> desperately want to put together a KDE livecd or something like that could
> do it themselves.
>
> -Mike
>
> --
> ________________________________
> Michael E. Crute
> Software Developer
> SoftGroup Development Corporation
>
> Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
> "In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2289 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Andrew Gaffney]

Michael Crute wrote:
> On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* <schizoid29@gmail.com 
> <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris
>     wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list
>     releng, more then likely
> 
> 
> Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about an 
> iso image?

Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:

* they are a work in progress, constantly changing
* they don't work with the released version of catalyst

-- 
Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project

-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 564 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris wont
> release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list releng, more
> then likely


Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about an iso
image?

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 867 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Mike Rosset]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1126 bytes --]

Ask Chris the story I got was the catalyst spec file will not produce a live
cd without a higly modified catalyst and fsscript. Honestly there not being
release simply because Chris wont release them.

I was working on a project that required those spec files to produce as
close to a working installer cd as possilbe. Basically I was told to make my
own. And that the spec files wont be release... well they might about the
time Vista comes out I beleive.

On 10/20/05, Michael Crute <mcrute@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris wont
> > release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list releng, more
> > then likely
>
>
> Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about an
> iso image?
>
> -Mike
>
> --
> ________________________________
> Michael E. Crute
> Software Developer
> SoftGroup Development Corporation
>
> Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
> "In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Mike Rosset]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 889 bytes --]

Why not there valid questions from the Gentoo community? why cant it be
discussed?

On 10/20/05, Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Michael Crute wrote:
> > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* <schizoid29@gmail.com
> > <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris
> > wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list
> > releng, more then likely
> >
> >
> > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about an
> > iso image?
>
> Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
>
> * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
> * they don't work with the released version of catalyst
>
> --
> Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
> Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project
>
> --
> gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1837 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Alan McGinlay]

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 15:15:48 -0500
Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Michael Crute wrote:
> > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* <schizoid29@gmail.com 
> > <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > 
> >     I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently
> > Chris wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to
> > another list releng, more then likely
> > 
> > 
> > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret
> > about an iso image?
> 
> Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
> 
> * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
> * they don't work with the released version of catalyst
> 

Why not release whatever changes you made to catalyst too then? 
-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2188 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 16:12 -0400, Michael Crute wrote:
> On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>         On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 02:28 +0800, John Walsh wrote:
>         > Ok, but will the CD still ahve everything it had before, or
>         will you be removing stuff to make
>         > room for X and all of that? If so, as I suspect, what will
>         be taken out? Is there a place where 
>         > people can look at what will be removed and maybe vote on
>         what needs to stay?
>         
>         Nothing is taken out.  The Universal CD is just the Minimal
>         CD, as far
>         as functionality is concerned.  This will be a more functional
>         CD.  As 
>         for voting, this isn't Survivor.  You don't get to vote anyone
>         off the
>         island.
> 
> Aww... come on... I wanna vote somebody off the island. 
> 
> Anyhow I think the minimal and the installer cd are the way to go.
> Perhaps if you just also release the source files you use to build the
> iso (I don't know what this would be, perhaps the catalyst file?) then
> people who desperately want to put together a KDE livecd or something
> like that could do it themselves.

Currently, much of the ISO generation is done manually.  As for what is
done upto livecd-stage1, I have actually said many times how to
accomplish this.  Take every package from the published "packagecd.spec"
for x86, add them to the end of "livecd-stage1.spec" and you're done.

To use my spec files, you would need my hand-hacked copy of catalyst,
which is currently useless on anything but my machine, since it has tons
of hard-coded information (distcc hosts, paths, etc) that I have no
plans on sanitizing just to release, considering it is a modification
from catalyst 1.1.10.10, and the catalyst 1.x line has reached EOL as we
are moving all development to catalyst 2.0, which will be capable of
building a LiveCD similar to mine.  At that time, I'll release specs
designed for catalyst 2.0 for public consumption.

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1278 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Michael Crute wrote:
> > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* <schizoid29@gmail.com
> > <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris
> > wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list
> > releng, more then likely
> >
> >
> > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about an
>
> > iso image?
>
> Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
>
> * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
> * they don't work with the released version of catalyst
>

OK, fine, thats good enough for me. I dont want to start some war between
Chris and Mike.

Another idea though, why not patch catalyst so they work and release them.
For pete sake people this is open source, must we bicker about "proprietary"
shit? In any case I am perfectly happy with the minimal CD as it is now, I'm
more curious than anything about these secret spec files.

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1820 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1386 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why not there valid questions from the Gentoo community? why cant it be
> discussed?
>
> On 10/20/05, Andrew Gaffney < agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > Michael Crute wrote:
> > > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* < schizoid29@gmail.com
> > > <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris
> > > wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list
> > > releng, more then likely
> > >
> > >
> > > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about
> > an
> > > iso image?
> >
> > Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
> >
> > * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
> > * they don't work with the released version of catalyst
> >
>
Well... as I gather this has already been discussed.

Alternatively if you need this so badly make your own darned cd. It really
cant be that difficult. After a simple google search I ended up with this.

http://syslinux.zytor.com/iso.php
http://www.geocities.com/potato.geo/bootlinuxcd.html

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2536 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Alan McGinlay]

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 22:26:24 +0200
Alan McGinlay <root@variant.me.uk> wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 15:15:48 -0500
> Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > Michael Crute wrote:
> > > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* <schizoid29@gmail.com 
> > > <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > 
> > >     I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently
> > > Chris wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to
> > > another list releng, more then likely
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret
> > > about an iso image?
> > 
> > Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
> > 
> > * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
> > * they don't work with the released version of catalyst
> > 
> 
> Why not release whatever changes you made to catalyst too then? 

Never mind, it was just answered satisfactorily with Chris Gianelloni's
most recent message.

-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1717 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > Aww... come on... I wanna vote somebody off the island.
> >
> > Anyhow I think the minimal and the installer cd are the way to go.
> > Perhaps if you just also release the source files you use to build the
> > iso (I don't know what this would be, perhaps the catalyst file?) then
> > people who desperately want to put together a KDE livecd or something
> > like that could do it themselves.
>
> Currently, much of the ISO generation is done manually. As for what is
> done upto livecd-stage1, I have actually said many times how to
> accomplish this. Take every package from the published "packagecd.spec"
> for x86, add them to the end of "livecd-stage1.spec" and you're done.
>
> To use my spec files, you would need my hand-hacked copy of catalyst,
> which is currently useless on anything but my machine, since it has tons
> of hard-coded information (distcc hosts, paths, etc) that I have no
> plans on sanitizing just to release, considering it is a modification
> from catalyst 1.1.10.10 <http://1.1.10.10>, and the catalyst 1.x line has
> reached EOL as we
> are moving all development to catalyst 2.0, which will be capable of
> building a LiveCD similar to mine. At that time, I'll release specs
> designed for catalyst 2.0 for public consumption.
>
>
Great... thats all I was curious about. I'm perfectly happy to let you make
the CDs. Thanks for the answer Chris.

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2126 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Mike Rosset]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1889 bytes --]

mkisofs is really not hard to do Andrew I can do that, I have requirements
that need to emulate the installer cd. If I just needed to make a custum cd
catalyst is fine or the good old fasion way works too. The point is your
installer cd is useless since it cannot be reproduced this makes it
proprietary, thats not to say it doesnt work as intended.


On 10/20/05, Michael Crute <mcrute@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Why not there valid questions from the Gentoo community? why cant it be
> > discussed?
> >
> > On 10/20/05, Andrew Gaffney < agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Michael Crute wrote:
> > > > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* < schizoid29@gmail.com
> > > > <mailto: schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris
> > > > wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list
> > > > releng, more then likely
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret
> > > about an
> > > > iso image?
> > >
> > > Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
> > >
> > > * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
> > > * they don't work with the released version of catalyst
> > >
> >
> Well... as I gather this has already been discussed.
>
> Alternatively if you need this so badly make your own darned cd. It really
> cant be that difficult. After a simple google search I ended up with this.
>
> http://syslinux.zytor.com/iso.php
> http://www.geocities.com/potato.geo/bootlinuxcd.html
>
> -Mike
>
> --
> ________________________________
> Michael E. Crute
> Software Developer
> SoftGroup Development Corporation
>
> Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
> "In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3539 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2649 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 16:16 -0400, Michael Crute wrote:
> On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
>         I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently
>         Chris wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to
>         another list releng, more then likely
> 
> Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about
> an iso image?

Ehh... I'm not releasing it because it won't work for you.  It's really
that simple.  When I was working on the ISO, rather than doing things
"right" and extensible, I did them "quick and dirty".  I added
hard-coded paths.  I changed pieces of code that I know will break other
things.  Besides this, I *still* have to do manual intervention in some
places to get things to work.

Basically, if I took a dump in a bag and gave it to you, you'd get about
as much use out of it.  If you want to look at my turd, at least let me
polish it for you.

Also, there's nothing "open source" about the spec files used to build a
CD.  While catalyst is released under the GPL, and the individual
packages are released under some open source license or another, the
actual spec files aren't under any license until I release them.  The
*only* reason that they get released is because of the general open
nature of Gentoo, not because of any licensing requirement.  Basically,
they get released because I want to release them.  At any rate, as I've
stated a few times (thanks for the troll, Mike!) already, I'll release
proper spec files after the release of catalyst 2.0, once there is
actually something that makes the spec files usable.  Until that time,
you can consider the spec files under the FWO (For Wolf Only) license.
If you want to peek at them, I'll fax you a NDA for you to sign after
you send me the check for a FWO license... :P

I could release what I have right now, but you wouldn't understand how
it works, since they would not work with any released version of
catalyst.  They wouldn't even work with catalyst 2.0 from CVS.  My spec
files work *only* on my *one* workstation that I've been using to build
the LiveCD on, simply because I was lazy and under a lot of pressure to
produce the CD in a very limited amount of time and have no interest to
spend countless hours cleaning it up just so I can release it in its
current ugly state.  Most of the code has already been pushed into
catalyst 2.0 CVS, but there's still a few patches I have to add before
that goes out for release.

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 852 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 15:15 -0500, Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> Michael Crute wrote:
> > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* <schizoid29@gmail.com 
> > <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > 
> >     I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently Chris
> >     wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to another list
> >     releng, more then likely
> > 
> > 
> > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about an 
> > iso image?
> 
> Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
> 
> * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
> * they don't work with the released version of catalyst

Actually, to clarify, they don't work with *any* version of
catalyst.  ;]

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3321 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 16:16 -0400, Michael Crute wrote:
> > On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently
> > Chris wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to
> > another list releng, more then likely
> >
> > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about
> > an iso image?
>
> Ehh... I'm not releasing it because it won't work for you. It's really
> that simple. When I was working on the ISO, rather than doing things
> "right" and extensible, I did them "quick and dirty". I added
> hard-coded paths. I changed pieces of code that I know will break other
> things. Besides this, I *still* have to do manual intervention in some
> places to get things to work.
>
> Basically, if I took a dump in a bag and gave it to you, you'd get about
> as much use out of it. If you want to look at my turd, at least let me
> polish it for you.
>
> Also, there's nothing "open source" about the spec files used to build a
> CD. While catalyst is released under the GPL, and the individual
> packages are released under some open source license or another, the
> actual spec files aren't under any license until I release them. The
> *only* reason that they get released is because of the general open
> nature of Gentoo, not because of any licensing requirement. Basically,
> they get released because I want to release them. At any rate, as I've
> stated a few times (thanks for the troll, Mike!) already, I'll release
> proper spec files after the release of catalyst 2.0, once there is
> actually something that makes the spec files usable. Until that time,
> you can consider the spec files under the FWO (For Wolf Only) license.
> If you want to peek at them, I'll fax you a NDA for you to sign after
> you send me the check for a FWO license... :P
>
> I could release what I have right now, but you wouldn't understand how
> it works, since they would not work with any released version of
> catalyst. They wouldn't even work with catalyst 2.0 from CVS. My spec
> files work *only* on my *one* workstation that I've been using to build
> the LiveCD on, simply because I was lazy and under a lot of pressure to
> produce the CD in a very limited amount of time and have no interest to
> spend countless hours cleaning it up just so I can release it in its
> current ugly state. Most of the code has already been pushed into
> catalyst 2.0 CVS, but there's still a few patches I have to add before
> that goes out for release.
>
>
OK like I said before your previous answer was fine. I don't feel the need
to walk the same path twice since you two have obviously argued this before.
The statement I made about open source had nothing to do with licensing and
everything to do with openness. In any case if its a sloppy hack, fine. If I
need a livecd I can make my own. In the meantime I'm happy to let you keep
generating the CDs, you do a good job at it.

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4068 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 789 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> mkisofs is really not hard to do Andrew I can do that, I have requirements
> that need to emulate the installer cd. If I just needed to make a custum cd
> catalyst is fine or the good old fasion way works too. The point is your
> installer cd is useless since it cannot be reproduced this makes it
> proprietary, thats not to say it doesnt work as intended.


Perhaps we should start another thread to bicker about this, or do as Chris
says and move it to the releng list.

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1082 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2347 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 16:28 -0400, Michael Crute wrote:
> On 10/20/05, Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
>         Michael Crute wrote:
>         > On 10/20/05, *Mike Rosset* <schizoid29@gmail.com
>         > <mailto:schizoid29@gmail.com>> wrote:
>         >
>         >     I've all ready asked for those and got shot down
>         appartently Chris
>         >     wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to
>         another list
>         >     releng, more then likely
>         >
>         >
>         > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so
>         secret about an 
>         > iso image?
>         
>         Let's not start this again. It comes down to this:
>         
>         * they are a work in progress, constantly changing
>         * they don't work with the released version of catalyst
> 
> OK, fine, thats good enough for me. I dont want to start some war
> between Chris and Mike. 
> 
> Another idea though, why not patch catalyst so they work and release
> them. For pete sake people this is open source, must we bicker about

The catalyst changes would make catalyst unusable for anything *other*
than creating a LiveCD.  On my machine, I actually have 3 versions of
catalyst currently.

catalyst - vanilla catalyst 1.1.10.10
catalyst2 - a catalyst 2.0 snapshot from today, being tested currently
catalyst-livecd - my hand-hacked catalyst

At any rate, it has nothing to do with open source.  I'm not giving out
some kind of "binary" version of my hacked catalyst, so there's no
requirement anywhere for me to give out anything.  Most of the custom
code is being slowly cleaned up and put into something usable, which
will be released in catalyst 2.0.  The "problem" is stemming from people
that cannot accept that I won't put out shit code *now* and refuse to
wait until it is released code.

>  "proprietary" shit? In any case I am perfectly happy with the minimal
> CD as it is now, I'm more curious than anything about these secret
> spec files.

There's nothing special about the spec files.  They look just like any
other spec file.  The "butter" is in the fsscript.sh, along with the
catalyst changes.

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Mike Rosset]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3624 bytes --]

I don't buy any of that, release the code a prove what you say is true. We
all know releng uses catalyst to master there iso's. Why wouldn't you in
this case? what is the point of Catalyst but to create the Gentoo's master
iso's?

And where is this elusive cvs for Catalyst 2?

I'm really glad your upstream providers dont treat you guys this way.
Imagine bash with out make files... I can just hear GNU saying "make your
own make files" ... google it.

And no I'm not troll since I can be reasoned with, my request is reasonable.
I havent seen any movement on your behalf Chris to even remotely trying to
help me.

On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 16:16 -0400, Michael Crute wrote:
> > On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently
> > Chris wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to
> > another list releng, more then likely
> >
> > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about
> > an iso image?
>
> Ehh... I'm not releasing it because it won't work for you. It's really
> that simple. When I was working on the ISO, rather than doing things
> "right" and extensible, I did them "quick and dirty". I added
> hard-coded paths. I changed pieces of code that I know will break other
> things. Besides this, I *still* have to do manual intervention in some
> places to get things to work.
>
> Basically, if I took a dump in a bag and gave it to you, you'd get about
> as much use out of it. If you want to look at my turd, at least let me
> polish it for you.
>
> Also, there's nothing "open source" about the spec files used to build a
> CD. While catalyst is released under the GPL, and the individual
> packages are released under some open source license or another, the
> actual spec files aren't under any license until I release them. The
> *only* reason that they get released is because of the general open
> nature of Gentoo, not because of any licensing requirement. Basically,
> they get released because I want to release them. At any rate, as I've
> stated a few times (thanks for the troll, Mike!) already, I'll release
> proper spec files after the release of catalyst 2.0, once there is
> actually something that makes the spec files usable. Until that time,
> you can consider the spec files under the FWO (For Wolf Only) license.
> If you want to peek at them, I'll fax you a NDA for you to sign after
> you send me the check for a FWO license... :P
>
> I could release what I have right now, but you wouldn't understand how
> it works, since they would not work with any released version of
> catalyst. They wouldn't even work with catalyst 2.0 from CVS. My spec
> files work *only* on my *one* workstation that I've been using to build
> the LiveCD on, simply because I was lazy and under a lot of pressure to
> produce the CD in a very limited amount of time and have no interest to
> spend countless hours cleaning it up just so I can release it in its
> current ugly state. Most of the code has already been pushed into
> catalyst 2.0 CVS, but there's still a few patches I have to add before
> that goes out for release.
>
> --
> Chris Gianelloni
> Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
> x86 Architecture Team
> Games - Developer
> Gentoo Linux
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQBDV//FkT4lNIS36YERAkIwAJ98BqzhJCluuQrn+Hvx/0t2JH+48gCfW4Nn
> YZ17k4QijCTpHjKJMXw2BGs=
> =4lUk
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4375 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1412 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 13:34 -0700, Mike Rosset wrote:
> mkisofs is really not hard to do Andrew I can do that, I have
> requirements that need to emulate the installer cd. If I just needed
> to make a custum cd catalyst is fine or the good old fasion way works
> too. The point is your installer cd is useless since it cannot be
> reproduced this makes it proprietary, thats not to say it doesnt work
> as intended.

*sigh*

It can easily be reproduced by someone versed in catalyst.  Go check out
the catalyst mailing list to see lots of people making their own LiveCD
images every day.  Just because you don't want to take the time to learn
catalyst does not make it my problem.

As I have tried to explain to you countless times before, you simply
would not be able to properly replicate the CD without my *exact* build
environment.  This means machine names (with proper distcc toolchains on
the proper ports, etc) and all kinds of other really nasty stuff in the
code that I don't feel like cleaning up.

I *am* cleaning up this code for release, and it is called catalyst 2.0.

Now, I've determined that you're nothing but a troll, so consider this
my last response to your mails, as I don't feel the need to feed a
troll.  It just makes them keep coming back.

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Mike Rosset]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1408 bytes --]

Honestly Michael I'm not bickering my request is valid, the installer cd
cannot be reproduced this makes it a proprietary product, its closed. You
might not have the need to modify the cd in anyway or reproduce it in
another fasion, but I do and I dont mean just any livecd. My requirement was
for it to be as close to the installer cd as possible. So you were right the
first time, why cant the spec files along with the patch of Catalyst be
released or atleast be put into cvs access for non-end user access?

On 10/20/05, Michael Crute <mcrute@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > mkisofs is really not hard to do Andrew I can do that, I have
> > requirements that need to emulate the installer cd. If I just needed to make
> > a custum cd catalyst is fine or the good old fasion way works too. The point
> > is your installer cd is useless since it cannot be reproduced this makes it
> > proprietary, thats not to say it doesnt work as intended.
>
>
> Perhaps we should start another thread to bicker about this, or do as
> Chris says and move it to the releng list.
>
> -Mike
>
> --
> ________________________________
> Michael E. Crute
> Software Developer
> SoftGroup Development Corporation
>
> Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
> "In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2118 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2284 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 13:54 -0700, Mike Rosset wrote:
> I don't buy any of that, release the code a prove what you say is
> true. We all know releng uses catalyst to master there iso's. Why
> wouldn't you in this case? what is the point of Catalyst but to create
> the Gentoo's master iso's?

I don't give a damn if you're not buying it.  I'm not selling it.  It is
fact.  Also, as the primary author of catalyst, would it not make sense
to you that I might make changes to the code on my own machine and
actually *test* it before committing it to CVS?  I'm sorry that much of
the concepts of development escape you, but a this point, I don't care
what you think about it.

> And where is this elusive cvs for Catalyst 2?

cvs.gentoo.org

You can go to viewcvs.gentoo.org and look at the gentoo module.
Catalyst is under src/catalyst.

> I'm really glad your upstream providers dont treat you guys this way.
> Imagine bash with out make files... I can just hear GNU saying "make
> your own make files" ... google it.

Except for one thing.  We actually work with our upstream providers.  We
don't make demands of them and treat them like they are our personal
slaves.  Not to mention, there are many cases where we have to write our
own Makefiles, so this is a pretty stupid argument.  Then again,
consider the source.

> And no I'm not troll since I can be reasoned with, my request is
> reasonable. I havent seen any movement on your behalf Chris to even
> remotely trying to help me.

No.  You cannot be reasoned with.  From the very beginning you've been
nothing but inflammatory and an asshole.  You're winning friends and
influencing people all over the place.

I'll gladly help people who want to be courteous about it.  I even
recommended you go to the gentoo-catalyst mailing list and ask
*specific* questions with anything you had a problem with when building
your CD.  Instead, you started making demands and being a general prick
to many people.

After all, am I also required to post my .vim files from my machines
that I do development on because "it's open source"? (Thanks joem!)

Don't be ludicrous.

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 993 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 14:04 -0700, Mike Rosset wrote:
> Honestly Michael I'm not bickering my request is valid, the installer
> cd cannot be reproduced this makes it a proprietary product, its
> closed.  You might not have the need to modify the cd in anyway or
> reproduce it in another fasion, but I do and I dont mean just any
> livecd. My requirement was for it to be as close to the installer cd
> as possible. So you were right the first time, why cant the spec files
> along with the patch of Catalyst be released or atleast be put into
> cvs access for non-end user access?

It can be reproduced.  I have seen several people that have been able to
produce a CD that is almost identical.  As I stated before, your lack of
knowledge and willingness to learn is *not my problem* in any way.

We don't have public CVS anyway, due to resource constraints.

-- 
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 --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Michael Crute]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1518 bytes --]

On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Honestly Michael I'm not bickering my request is valid, the installer cd
> cannot be reproduced this makes it a proprietary product, its closed. You
> might not have the need to modify the cd in anyway or reproduce it in
> another fasion, but I do and I dont mean just any livecd. My requirement was
> for it to be as close to the installer cd as possible. So you were right the
> first time, why cant the spec files along with the patch of Catalyst be
> released or atleast be put into cvs access for non-end user access?
>

No Mike, you are bickering. Your requests may be valid but you where told no
twice now, give it up. I'm sure Chris will release the blasted spec files
when everything works. In the meantime if you must have those cds so
desperately take the damned iso apart and make your own cd but quit bitching
about it.

On a side note, devrel is just gonna tell you to go pound sand because it is
amazingly obvious that 1) Chris is putting a lot of his free time into
making things work and 2) your demands are unreasonable at this point. I
would spare my time and dignity and just wait till the spec files get
released. In the interim quit bitching, we don't want to hear it.

-Mike

--
________________________________
Michael E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation

Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1838 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Alan McGinlay]

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:54:43 -0700
Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>I don't buy any of that</snip>

Are you only here to harass people or do you actually have something
meaningful to offer?
-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1067 bytes --]

First off, I would like to apologize to all of you for the contents of
this thread and for being forced to read over this dribble.

Now, for a little nugget of information just for you folks for being so
patient (and to get back on-topic).

I'm currently working on a new version of the Installer LiveCD.  This
one is using a newer snapshot of the Gentoo Linux Installer.  This new
CD has working GRP support, for supported packages.  Currently, the
dialog-based front-end shows which packages are to be built dynamically
by adding a little (GRP).  Essentially, you can pick any of the packages
during the "extra packages" step and have 0 compiling.  Support for this
is coming in the GTK+ front-end, but was not completed in time to go
onto this CD.  I am currently finalizing a few minor bugs with the CD,
which I will announce here once it is complete and on its way out to the
mirrors.

Again, thanks for all of the patience.

-- 
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 --]

[gentoo-installer] remove

[mpianta]

__________________________________________________________________
TISCALI ADSL
Solo con Tiscali Adsl navighi senza limiti e telefoni senza canone 
Telecom a partire da 19,95 Euro/mese.
Attivala subito, I PRIMI DUE MESI SONO GRATIS! CLICCA QUI:
http://abbonati.tiscali.it/adsl/sa/1e25flat_tc/




-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-installer] remove

[alphapixel mms [TS]]

DONE *LOL*

mpianta schrieb:
> 
> __________________________________________________________________
> TISCALI ADSL
> Solo con Tiscali Adsl navighi senza limiti e telefoni senza canone 
> Telecom a partire da 19,95 Euro/mese.
> Attivala subito, I PRIMI DUE MESI SONO GRATIS! CLICCA QUI:
> http://abbonati.tiscali.it/adsl/sa/1e25flat_tc/
> 
-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-installer] unsubscrive

[mpianta]

sorry man

__________________________________________________________________
TISCALI ADSL
Solo con Tiscali Adsl navighi senza limiti e telefoni senza canone 
Telecom a partire da 19,95 Euro/mese.
Attivala subito, I PRIMI DUE MESI SONO GRATIS! CLICCA QUI:
http://abbonati.tiscali.it/adsl/sa/1e25flat_tc/




-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-installer] unsubscribe

[mpianta]

last check

>-- Messaggio Originale --
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:19:28 +0200
>From: "mpianta" <fxtech@tiscali.it>
>Subject: [gentoo-installer] unsubscrive
>To: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org
>Reply-to: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org
>
>
>sorry man
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>TISCALI ADSL
>Solo con Tiscali Adsl navighi senza limiti e telefoni senza canone 
>Telecom a partire da 19,95 Euro/mese.
>Attivala subito, I PRIMI DUE MESI SONO GRATIS! CLICCA QUI:
>http://abbonati.tiscali.it/adsl/sa/1e25flat_tc/
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list
>


__________________________________________________________________
TISCALI ADSL
Solo con Tiscali Adsl navighi senza limiti e telefoni senza canone 
Telecom a partire da 19,95 Euro/mese.
Attivala subito, I PRIMI DUE MESI SONO GRATIS! CLICCA QUI:
http://abbonati.tiscali.it/adsl/sa/1e25flat_tc/




-- 
gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list