[gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Derek Tracy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5515 bytes --]

This is a lot longer than I originally intended it to be so if you want the
jist of it skip to the end.

(DISCLAIMER: Let me start off by saying that this is truly not a flame but
more of a concern. So please do not flame me for stating my
opinions/concerns.)

I have been an avid Gentoo User for 2 and 1/2 years now. I have installed
Gentoo on many different platforms including HPPA and Sparc, not too mention
the countless x86 installs. I have never had a problem, every install has
went smooth. I have done both Stage3 and Stage1 installs (I have always
preferred a Stage1 install).

Recently, I decided that it was time to reinstall due to the numerous
packages that I had installed and different DE's / WM configurations, and I
must admit that I have recently been diving into LVM2 and encryption (I
figured that starting from scratch would be my best bet). In the past I have
always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge). But since this was going
to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all ~x86
flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages.

Now since we have the background we will get to the questions at hand.
During this install I have run into nothing but problems. I boot from the
livecd just fine (if I append nopcmcia and dolvm2) and everything goes
smooth. NOTE: I am performing this install step by step from the online
handbook with a slight modification I am using LVM2 for /usr /usr/portage
/opt /var /tmp /home (I figured I would take advantage of some setuid
security procedures). Part way through the online handbook I noticed that
they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers
thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. So
I installed everything according to the handbook and all went well until I
restarted.

After restarting I noticed that ipw2200 did not load properly was posted in
my boot mesg WTF. I distinctly remembered during the install that I waited
until after I installed the kernel, then I went ahead and installed the
external modules. (NOTE: I did not use the built in kernel modules for
ipw2200 or ieee80211 I had read too many horror stories about incompatible
versions of ipw2200-firmware and I have always had good luck with the
external drivers) One other thing, instead of going for pure on the edge
goodness of using a Nitro-esque kernel (one optimized for speed over
stability) I decided to use Gentoo-sources again trusting the developers
judgement. After searching through tons of articles regarding ipw2200
drivers not working with the latest "Stable" Gentoo-Sources I decided to go
with the kernel drivers and give them a shot. I recompiled rebooted and low
and behold the drivers still weren't working. After trying all sorts of
different combinations Unstable versions of this stable versions of that.
Nothing worked, so I proceeded to reboot back into the livecd and re-chroot
into my system so I could get a network connection and install the Madwifi
Drivers, for a pcmcia card that I have laying around. Also note that the
Madwifi drivers are considered Unstable. I rebooted the computer and the
drivers actually worked (Yea Unstable). So I got the network connection up,
then I decided to go ahead and install X (I thought that it would be easier
to troubleshoot the ipw drivers from a graphical environment copy, paste,
multiple xterms.). Well I compiled and installed Xorg and compiled and
installed nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx, and what do you think happened (btw I
copied over a backed up xorg.conf from the last installation so I know that
that conf file works and is correct) I went to startx...........It kicked
back saying screens were found but no usable configs......So down
troubleshooting lane I went. I recompiled, verified I did not have agpgart /
dri enabled in kernel, then with both in kernel, stable and unstable
versions of nvidia-kernel / nvidia-glx, everything a no go.. I finally
settled with using Xorg's nv driver. Now here I am with a really nice laptop
(Sony S-460) but with no video hardware acceleration, the inablility to use
the built in wireless card (NOTE: before the reinstall everything was
working).

So now I am waiting for the whole system to recompile using ~x86 (the so
called "Unstable" packages) and I will see if that works or not.

I am seriously reconsidering finding another OS to use, this whole headache
has been totally ridiculous. I could see this if I would have emerged all of
the unstable packages to begin with or even perform a Stage1 install after
the developers decided to make the Stage3 the default. But I didn't I did
everything according to the documentation (and I triple checked that I did
not skip anything).

So with all of this said if the developers do not start testing everything a
little more thoroughly then I predict there will be a serious drop in the
number of Gentoo Followers out there. Especially if a Gentoo Veteren has
this hard of a time installing the operating system that I love.

When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should
work, yes there will always be configuration glitches but the problems I
have had during this install were not from configuration glitches. They are
what looks like incompatible packages and numerous other things. If Gentoo
is going to continue to grow then we as a community need to speak up about
things like this.

--
---------------------------------
Derek Tracy
tracyde@gmail.com
---------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5932 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Mark Knecht]

On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
> (DISCLAIMER: Let me start off by saying that this is truly not a flame but
> more of a concern.  So please do not flame me for stating my
> opinions/concerns.)
<SNIP>

Understood. I certainly didn't take it that way.

>
> I have been an avid Gentoo User for 2 and 1/2 years now.

About the same as me.

<SNIP>
>  In the past I
> have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge).  But since this was
> going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all
> ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages.

Right.

>
> Now since we have the background we will get to the questions at hand.
> During this install I have run into nothing but problems.
<SNIP>
... with a slight modification I am using LVM2 for /usr /usr/portage
> /opt /var /tmp /home (I figured I would take advantage of some setuid
> security procedures).  Part way through the online handbook I noticed that
> they standardized the Stage3 install.  I figured that since the developers
> thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.  So
> I installed everything according to the handbook and all went well until I
> restarted.

Yes, but I've done FC installs that did the same thing. It's not
limited to Gentoo.
<BIG SNIP --- IT'S ABOVE MY PAY GRADE>
>
> So now I am waiting for the whole system to recompile using ~x86 (the so
> called "Unstable" packages) and I will see if that works or not.

Bummer. The Gentoo install is a lot of work. To completely restart is
painful. Was there really no other option? I don't remember you asking
about this. Did I miss it?

>
> I am seriously reconsidering finding another OS to use, this whole headache
> has been totally ridiculous.  I could see this if I would have emerged all
> of the unstable packages to begin with or even perform a Stage1 install
> after the developers decided to make the Stage3 the default.  But I didn't I
> did everything according to the documentation (and I triple checked that I
> did not skip anything).
>
> So with all of this said if the developers do not start testing everything a
> little more thoroughly then I predict there will be a serious drop in the
> number of Gentoo Followers out there.  Especially if a Gentoo Veteren has
> this hard of a time installing the operating system that I love.

In some ways I agree. I have an AMD64 machine (I'm writing you from
it) that has a LOT of packages as ~amd64 to make it usable. I
recognize that this is newer hardware and I expected this would be
required, but recently I've noticed portage getting hinky about ~x86
vs. ~amd64. My /etc/postage/package.use file is getting weird trying
to keep up. Portage is trying to downgrade things that are marked
~x86. I change them to ~amd64 and it lets me keep them. Something
feels wrong about that.

But at least my system works. (mostly...) I have no complaints. Just concerns...


>
> When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should
> work, yes there will always be configuration glitches but the problems I
> have had during this install were not from configuration glitches.  They are
> what looks like incompatible packages and numerous other things.  If Gentoo
> is going to continue to grow then we as a community need to speak up about
> things like this.
>

Well, yes and no. I don't think that 'stable' is the same as
'guaranteed'. None the less I agree with what I think is the sentiment
of your statement. In some of the online polls it seems that Gentoo's
popularity has dropped a bit lately. Personally I'm more and more
impressed with it every day. It's only been on my AMD64 machine that
I've seen many issues.

I will admit that I have a big concern about an upcoming MySQL update
that is probably going to break my whole TV network here. Due to my
fear I haven't upgraded MySQL and will likely come back ranting myself
sometime in December when I'm probably forced to do it. We'll see...
;-)

Best of luck getting the problems worked out.

cheers,
Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[A. Khattri]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Mark Knecht wrote:

> I will admit that I have a big concern about an upcoming MySQL update
> that is probably going to break my whole TV network here. Due to my
> fear I haven't upgraded MySQL and will likely come back ranting myself
> sometime in December when I'm probably forced to do it. We'll see...

I have upgraded MySQL on several servers (two in production) without any
problems whatsoever...


-- 

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Daniel da Veiga]

On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a lot longer than I originally intended it to be so if you want the
> jist of it skip to the end.
>
> (DISCLAIMER: Let me start off by saying that this is truly not a flame but
> more of a concern.  So please do not flame me for stating my
> opinions/concerns.)

Guess you won't get any flames, just considerable advices, cause we
don't wanna loose a Gentooer :)

> I have been an avid Gentoo User for 2 and 1/2 years now.  I have installed
> Gentoo on many different platforms including HPPA and Sparc, not too mention
> the countless x86 installs.  I have never had a problem, every install has
> went smooth.  I have done both Stage3 and Stage1 installs (I have always
> preferred a Stage1 install).
>
> Recently, I decided that it was time to reinstall due to the numerous
> packages that I had installed and different DE's / WM configurations, and I
> must admit that I have recently been diving into LVM2 and encryption (I
> figured that starting from scratch would be my best bet).  In the past I
> have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge).  But since this was
> going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all
> ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages.

I would never even consider completely reinstall a working
environment, specially one that installation and configuration is 90%
of the work you'll ever have dealing with the machine (except maybe
for hardware failures).

> Now since we have the background we will get to the questions at hand.
> During this install I have run into nothing but problems.  I boot from the
> livecd just fine (if I append nopcmcia and dolvm2) and everything goes
> smooth.  NOTE: I am performing this install step by step from the online
> handbook with a slight modification I am using LVM2 for /usr /usr/portage
> /opt /var /tmp /home (I figured I would take advantage of some setuid
> security procedures).  Part way through the online handbook I noticed that
> they standardized the Stage3 install.  I figured that since the developers
> thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.  So
> I installed everything according to the handbook and all went well until I
> restarted.

You see, I'm one of those guys that think: "if you got the livecd
working, network, maybe video, sound or anything else with NO DISC,
your system is gentooable". :) of course you may run into problems
accourding to your config and special needs, it always happened to me,
but hey, at least you know what you're doying, not like those easy,
complete, fast and general installations that keeps LOTS of trash
making your system crawl compared to a clean, wise and configurated
environment.

> After restarting I noticed that ipw2200 did not load properly was posted in
> my boot mesg WTF.  I distinctly remembered during the install that I waited
> until after I installed the kernel, then I went ahead and installed the
> external modules.  (NOTE: I did not use the built in kernel modules for
> ipw2200 or ieee80211 I had read too many horror stories about incompatible
> versions of ipw2200-firmware and I have always had good luck with the
> external drivers)  One other thing, instead of going for pure on the edge
> goodness of using a Nitro-esque kernel (one optimized for speed over
> stability) I decided to use Gentoo-sources again trusting the developers
> judgement.  After searching through tons of articles regarding ipw2200
> drivers not working with the latest "Stable" Gentoo-Sources I decided to go
> with the kernel drivers and give them a shot.  I recompiled rebooted and low
> and behold the drivers still weren't working.  After trying all sorts of
> different combinations Unstable versions of this stable versions of that.
> Nothing worked, so I proceeded to reboot back into the livecd and re-chroot
> into my system so I could get a network connection and install the Madwifi
> Drivers, for a pcmcia card that I have laying around.  Also note that the
> Madwifi drivers are considered Unstable.  I rebooted the computer and the
> drivers actually worked (Yea Unstable).  So I got the network connection up,
> then I decided to go ahead and install X (I thought that it would be easier
> to troubleshoot the ipw drivers from a graphical environment copy, paste,
> multiple xterms.).  Well I compiled and installed Xorg and compiled and
> installed nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx, and what do you think happened (btw I
> copied over a backed up xorg.conf from the last installation so I know that
> that conf file works and is correct) I went to startx...........It kicked
> back saying screens were found but no usable configs......So down
> troubleshooting lane I went.  I recompiled, verified I did not have agpgart
> / dri enabled in kernel, then with both in kernel, stable and unstable
> versions of nvidia-kernel / nvidia-glx, everything a no go.. I finally
> settled with using Xorg's nv driver.  Now here I am with a really nice
> laptop (Sony S-460) but with no video hardware acceleration, the inablility
> to use the built in wireless card (NOTE: before the reinstall everything was
> working).
>
> So now I am waiting for the whole system to recompile using ~x86 (the so
> called "Unstable" packages) and I will see if that works or not.

I'm a stable user, so, would never do that, can't predict what can go wrong...

> I am seriously reconsidering finding another OS to use, this whole headache
> has been totally ridiculous.  I could see this if I would have emerged all
> of the unstable packages to begin with or even perform a Stage1 install
> after the developers decided to make the Stage3 the default.  But I didn't I
> did everything according to the documentation (and I triple checked that I
> did not skip anything).

Well, Gentoo is choices, you can even choose not to use it, but it was
always the best choice for everything Linux I've needed so far... OK,
so, I spent a week configuration my last system install, but its
working for about 3 months now, flawless, it was worth the time spent.
At home, it took me a month to completely setup the system, including
Xorg and Desktop Manager, well, nine or so months flawless, my memory
was gone bad, my CD drive broke, and still, my system OS is up-to-date
and running. Never got nothing like this with any OS I've tried.

> So with all of this said if the developers do not start testing everything a
> little more thoroughly then I predict there will be a serious drop in the
> number of Gentoo Followers out there.  Especially if a Gentoo Veteren has
> this hard of a time installing the operating system that I love.

I can sincerely disagree with you. And that's why I have spread the
word and made a lot of friends start working with gentoo, most of them
liked it and are spreading the word. Of course, installing gentoo is a
time consuming task, configuring it is even more time consuming, but
hey, that's a small price to pay for complete control over your
system.

> When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should
> work, yes there will always be configuration glitches but the problems I
> have had during this install were not from configuration glitches.  They are
> what looks like incompatible packages and numerous other things.  If Gentoo
> is going to continue to grow then we as a community need to speak up about
> things like this.

Testing is hard work, I would not blame the Gentoo Team for this,
there are infinite combinations of hardware, software and configs that
may cause different problems, and if you want a working system that is
flawless, fast and reliable, you give up some good stuff from other
OSs, like easy installs, easy hardware replacement, easy
configuration.

This is just my 2 cents, many people will disagree, but I won't change
my OS for a long time, Gentoo rocks, and small changes (like stage1
for stage3 default install) won't harm me that much, I choose installs
depending on hardware and network availability, not just because one
is faster or default. I'm even considering Gentoo compatibility when
buying new hardware for my systems, and advicing my fellows at work to
do the same, if Gentoo runs it, to hell with the rest.

> --
> ---------------------------------
> Derek Tracy
> tracyde@gmail.com
> ---------------------------------
>



--
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Derek Tracy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10266 bytes --]

On 11/16/05, Daniel da Veiga <danieldaveiga@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is a lot longer than I originally intended it to be so if you want
> the
> > jist of it skip to the end.
> >
> > (DISCLAIMER: Let me start off by saying that this is truly not a flame
> but
> > more of a concern. So please do not flame me for stating my
> > opinions/concerns.)
>
> Guess you won't get any flames, just considerable advices, cause we
> don't wanna loose a Gentooer :)
>
> > I have been an avid Gentoo User for 2 and 1/2 years now. I have
> installed
> > Gentoo on many different platforms including HPPA and Sparc, not too
> mention
> > the countless x86 installs. I have never had a problem, every install
> has
> > went smooth. I have done both Stage3 and Stage1 installs (I have always
> > preferred a Stage1 install).
> >
> > Recently, I decided that it was time to reinstall due to the numerous
> > packages that I had installed and different DE's / WM configurations,
> and I
> > must admit that I have recently been diving into LVM2 and encryption (I
> > figured that starting from scratch would be my best bet). In the past I
> > have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge). But since this
> was
> > going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set
> all
> > ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages.
>
> I would never even consider completely reinstall a working
> environment, specially one that installation and configuration is 90%
> of the work you'll ever have dealing with the machine (except maybe
> for hardware failures).



The biggest reason for the reinstall was because in my contant playing
around with DE's and WM's trying to find one that I completely liked. I had
KDE, GNOME, E17, FVWM, OpenBOX (I think that is it) all on my system. In all
of my toying around I found out a lot about myself, for 1 GUI applications
make me work slower and FVWM was and is all I need to make me happy. So I
could either unemerge KDE GNOME and the rest (which would surely leave all
sorts of unneeded libs and things) or I could reinstall. To me
reinstallation sounded a lot easier. Also note that this is the first time
that I have had a really hard time getting Gentoo to work. (I will most
likely never reinstall on this machine again.)

> Now since we have the background we will get to the questions at hand.
> > During this install I have run into nothing but problems. I boot from
> the
> > livecd just fine (if I append nopcmcia and dolvm2) and everything goes
> > smooth. NOTE: I am performing this install step by step from the online
> > handbook with a slight modification I am using LVM2 for /usr
> /usr/portage
> > /opt /var /tmp /home (I figured I would take advantage of some setuid
> > security procedures). Part way through the online handbook I noticed
> that
> > they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the
> developers
> > thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.
> So
> > I installed everything according to the handbook and all went well until
> I
> > restarted.
>
> You see, I'm one of those guys that think: "if you got the livecd
> working, network, maybe video, sound or anything else with NO DISC,
> your system is gentooable". :) of course you may run into problems
> accourding to your config and special needs, it always happened to me,
> but hey, at least you know what you're doying, not like those easy,
> complete, fast and general installations that keeps LOTS of trash
> making your system crawl compared to a clean, wise and configurated
> environment.
>
> > After restarting I noticed that ipw2200 did not load properly was posted
> in
> > my boot mesg WTF. I distinctly remembered during the install that I
> waited
> > until after I installed the kernel, then I went ahead and installed the
> > external modules. (NOTE: I did not use the built in kernel modules for
> > ipw2200 or ieee80211 I had read too many horror stories about
> incompatible
> > versions of ipw2200-firmware and I have always had good luck with the
> > external drivers) One other thing, instead of going for pure on the edge
> > goodness of using a Nitro-esque kernel (one optimized for speed over
> > stability) I decided to use Gentoo-sources again trusting the developers
> > judgement. After searching through tons of articles regarding ipw2200
> > drivers not working with the latest "Stable" Gentoo-Sources I decided to
> go
> > with the kernel drivers and give them a shot. I recompiled rebooted and
> low
> > and behold the drivers still weren't working. After trying all sorts of
> > different combinations Unstable versions of this stable versions of
> that.
> > Nothing worked, so I proceeded to reboot back into the livecd and
> re-chroot
> > into my system so I could get a network connection and install the
> Madwifi
> > Drivers, for a pcmcia card that I have laying around. Also note that the
> > Madwifi drivers are considered Unstable. I rebooted the computer and the
> > drivers actually worked (Yea Unstable). So I got the network connection
> up,
> > then I decided to go ahead and install X (I thought that it would be
> easier
> > to troubleshoot the ipw drivers from a graphical environment copy,
> paste,
> > multiple xterms.). Well I compiled and installed Xorg and compiled and
> > installed nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx, and what do you think happened (btw
> I
> > copied over a backed up xorg.conf from the last installation so I know
> that
> > that conf file works and is correct) I went to startx...........It
> kicked
> > back saying screens were found but no usable configs......So down
> > troubleshooting lane I went. I recompiled, verified I did not have
> agpgart
> > / dri enabled in kernel, then with both in kernel, stable and unstable
> > versions of nvidia-kernel / nvidia-glx, everything a no go.. I finally
> > settled with using Xorg's nv driver. Now here I am with a really nice
> > laptop (Sony S-460) but with no video hardware acceleration, the
> inablility
> > to use the built in wireless card (NOTE: before the reinstall everything
> was
> > working).
> >
> > So now I am waiting for the whole system to recompile using ~x86 (the so
> > called "Unstable" packages) and I will see if that works or not.
>
> I'm a stable user, so, would never do that, can't predict what can go
> wrong...


That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable..... From what I am
seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not mean
stable anymore.

> I am seriously reconsidering finding another OS to use, this whole
> headache
> > has been totally ridiculous. I could see this if I would have emerged
> all
> > of the unstable packages to begin with or even perform a Stage1 install
> > after the developers decided to make the Stage3 the default. But I
> didn't I
> > did everything according to the documentation (and I triple checked that
> I
> > did not skip anything).
>
> Well, Gentoo is choices, you can even choose not to use it, but it was
> always the best choice for everything Linux I've needed so far... OK,
> so, I spent a week configuration my last system install, but its
> working for about 3 months now, flawless, it was worth the time spent.
> At home, it took me a month to completely setup the system, including
> Xorg and Desktop Manager, well, nine or so months flawless, my memory
> was gone bad, my CD drive broke, and still, my system OS is up-to-date
> and running. Never got nothing like this with any OS I've tried.
>
> > So with all of this said if the developers do not start testing
> everything a
> > little more thoroughly then I predict there will be a serious drop in
> the
> > number of Gentoo Followers out there. Especially if a Gentoo Veteren has
> > this hard of a time installing the operating system that I love.
>
> I can sincerely disagree with you. And that's why I have spread the
> word and made a lot of friends start working with gentoo, most of them
> liked it and are spreading the word. Of course, installing gentoo is a
> time consuming task, configuring it is even more time consuming, but
> hey, that's a small price to pay for complete control over your
> system.
>
> > When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should
> > work, yes there will always be configuration glitches but the problems I
> > have had during this install were not from configuration glitches. They
> are
> > what looks like incompatible packages and numerous other things. If
> Gentoo
> > is going to continue to grow then we as a community need to speak up
> about
> > things like this.
>
> Testing is hard work, I would not blame the Gentoo Team for this,
> there are infinite combinations of hardware, software and configs that
> may cause different problems, and if you want a working system that is
> flawless, fast and reliable, you give up some good stuff from other
> OSs, like easy installs, easy hardware replacement, easy
> configuration.


I would definately agree with you if I was installing things that are out of
the ordinary. But I am not it is merely a system install by the handbook
(which was written by developers).

This is just my 2 cents, many people will disagree, but I won't change
> my OS for a long time, Gentoo rocks, and small changes (like stage1
> for stage3 default install) won't harm me that much, I choose installs
> depending on hardware and network availability, not just because one
> is faster or default. I'm even considering Gentoo compatibility when
> buying new hardware for my systems, and advicing my fellows at work to
> do the same, if Gentoo runs it, to hell with the rest.
>
> > --
> > ---------------------------------
> > Derek Tracy
> > tracyde@gmail.com
> > ---------------------------------
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel da Veiga
> Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
> PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
---------------------------------
Derek Tracy
tracyde@gmail.com
---------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 12016 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Jeff Smelser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1467 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:50 pm, Derek Tracy wrote:

> That is what I was  thinking when I switched to stable.....  From what I am
> seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not mean
> stable anymore.

But thats not what you said. I Quote: 

"In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge).  But 
since this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method 
and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific 
packages. " 

This means your MIXING the two and is only recommended once the system is up. 
During an install, you should do one or the other, not start mixing and 
matching. HOWEVER, if you did set all to x86, and havent touched 
package.keyword, read the next paragraph.

Stable is fine.. I really dont understand how some modules have ANY thing to 
do with being x86 or ~x86..  Modules are always finicky, no matter what linux 
distro you use.. You probably are just forgetting to compile in the kernel 
options you had before, that you do not now have. (Guessing of course). 

Sounds to me you just re-installed before making sure you had all your ducks 
in a row and blaming it on gentoo. I havent seen anything in your message 
that I can say, gentoo did it, and you didnt do it yourself.. It all really 
just sounds like configuration issues, that happens on all new install, no 
matter the distro, x86/~x86, or otherwise.

Jeff

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Derek Tracy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2122 bytes --]

On 11/16/05, Jeff Smelser <tradergt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:50 pm, Derek Tracy wrote:
>
> > That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable..... From what I
> am
> > seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not
> mean
> > stable anymore.
>
> But thats not what you said. I Quote:
>
> "In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge). But
> since this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred
> method
> and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific
> packages. "


This means your MIXING the two and is only recommended once the system is
> up.
> During an install, you should do one or the other, not start mixing and
> matching. HOWEVER, if you did set all to x86, and havent touched
> package.keyword, read the next paragraph.


I did not set any of the flags as I wanted to get the system up and running
first. What I was doing was pointing out that if I needed to set the ~x86
flag on any packages then I would do so via the above stated file.

Stable is fine.. I really dont understand how some modules have ANY thing to
> do with being x86 or ~x86.. Modules are always finicky, no matter what
> linux
> distro you use.. You probably are just forgetting to compile in the kernel
> options you had before, that you do not now have. (Guessing of course).


Been there and checked that. Confirmed to not be the case.

Sounds to me you just re-installed before making sure you had all your ducks
> in a row and blaming it on gentoo. I havent seen anything in your message
> that I can say, gentoo did it, and you didnt do it yourself.. It all
> really
> just sounds like configuration issues, that happens on all new install, no
> matter the distro, x86/~x86, or otherwise.


I would have to disagree with you on this. I do not believe that it is a
config issue I beleive that many of the x86 packages still do not play well
with each other, that is what I am saying needs fixed.

Jeff
>
>
>


--
---------------------------------
Derek Tracy
tracyde@gmail.com
---------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3185 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Richard Fish]

On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would have to disagree with you on this.  I do not believe that it is a
> config issue I beleive that many of the x86 packages still do not play well
> with each other, that is what I am saying needs fixed.

Again, be specific please.  Give us actual error messages or log
entries so we see what problems you are running into.

Although I run completely ~x86 (along with lots of unmasked stuff),
many (most?) of the people here are running the stable tree, without
the major conflicts you are claiming.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1447 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:50:00 -0500, Derek Tracy wrote:

> The biggest reason for the reinstall was because in my contant playing
> around with DE's and WM's trying to find one that I completely liked. I
> had KDE, GNOME, E17, FVWM, OpenBOX (I think that is it) all on my
> system. In all of my toying around I found out a lot about myself, for
> 1 GUI applications make me work slower and FVWM was and is all I need
> to make me happy. So I could either unemerge KDE GNOME and the rest
> (which would surely leave all sorts of unneeded libs and things) or I
> could reinstall.

emerge -C kde-meta gnome
emerge depclean -a

Much easier than reinstalling, and the reason for depclean.

> To me reinstallation sounded a lot easier.

Reinstallation is never easier. All it ever does is hide the issues, you
never find out how to resolve them.

> That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable..... From what I
> am seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does
> not mean stable anymore.

It's not about stable code, that is up to the upstream developers. arch
vs. ~arch is about the stability of the ebuilds, and this is using stable
in the same way that Debian do; not changing. An arch ebuild is stable
because it has not changed in, usually, at least 30 days. A ~arch ebuild
is for testing, it does not mean the program is unstable.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

First Law of Laboratory Work:

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Derek Tracy]

On 11/16/05, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:50:00 -0500, Derek Tracy wrote:
>
> > The biggest reason for the reinstall was because in my contant playing
> > around with DE's and WM's trying to find one that I completely liked. I
> > had KDE, GNOME, E17, FVWM, OpenBOX (I think that is it) all on my
> > system. In all of my toying around I found out a lot about myself, for
> > 1 GUI applications make me work slower and FVWM was and is all I need
> > to make me happy. So I could either unemerge KDE GNOME and the rest
> > (which would surely leave all sorts of unneeded libs and things) or I
> > could reinstall.
>
> emerge -C kde-meta gnome
> emerge depclean -a

Thank you.  If this system gets over cluttered again I will do just that.

>
> Much easier than reinstalling, and the reason for depclean.
>
> > To me reinstallation sounded a lot easier.
>
> Reinstallation is never easier. All it ever does is hide the issues, you
> never find out how to resolve them.
>
> > That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable..... From what I
> > am seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does
> > not mean stable anymore.
>
> It's not about stable code, that is up to the upstream developers. arch
> vs. ~arch is about the stability of the ebuilds, and this is using stable
> in the same way that Debian do; not changing. An arch ebuild is stable
> because it has not changed in, usually, at least 30 days. A ~arch ebuild
> is for testing, it does not mean the program is unstable.
>
I can definately see your point and I have never heard arch and ~arch
explained like that.  It gives me a lot of food for thought.  Again
thank you.

>
> --
> Neil Bothwick
>
> First Law of Laboratory Work:
>
>
>

To give a big update.  In the original post I mentioned that I was in
the middle of doing an emerge -e world after changing from x86 to ~x86

Well after the compile completed I did a quick etc-update.. Re-emerged
madwifi-driver and ipw2200 ipw2200-firmware nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx
(I did not change any other config files) and low and behold after a
quick reboot everything was working again.

--
---------------------------------
Derek Tracy
tracyde@gmail.com
---------------------------------

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Nagatoro]

Derek Tracy wrote:
[...]

> (I did not change any other config files) and low and behold after a
> quick reboot everything was working again.
> 

The magic of computers :)


-- 
Naga
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[jarmstrong]

<SNIP>

I use Gentoo to run all my boxen and I love it.  That being said, I have 
ALWAYS done a stage1 install.  Never had a single problem I couldn't fix.  
Then, suddenly, they switched everything to stage3 and removed a LOT of 
options from the Gentoo build process.  I LIKED being able to modify the 
bootstrap script.  I LIKED editing the ebuilds for certain important system 
packages during initial system build.  Why have they now decided to force us 
to rebuild our systems if we want to tweak settings?  Now I must use a larger 
hard disc for an install, as all ebuilds install userland binaries 
to /usr/bin, even if I want to install to /usr/local/netshare/bin as a 
network shared executable.  This a VERY inconvenient, since some system 
packages (loggers, cron daemons) can be installed on a single server and 
referenced from other boxen to reduce dependency on hard disk installs.  Just 
a rant here, but Gentoo used to be about choices.  Now one of the biggest 
choices in the Gentoo universe has been taken away from the user.  Is Gentoo 
becoming just another canned off-the-shelf *nix distro?

Joshua Armstrong
jarmstrong@wi.rr.com

> > --
> > ---------------------------------
> > Derek Tracy
> > tracyde@gmail.com
> > ---------------------------------
>
> --
> Daniel da Veiga
> Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
> PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1352 bytes --]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:44:49 +0000, jarmstrong@wi.rr.com wrote:

> <SNIP>
> 
> I use Gentoo to run all my boxen and I love it.  That being said, I
> have ALWAYS done a stage1 install.  Never had a single problem I
> couldn't fix. Then, suddenly, they switched everything to stage3 and
> removed a LOT of options from the Gentoo build process.

[snip]

> Now one of the biggest choices in
> the Gentoo universe has been taken away from the user.  Is Gentoo
> becoming just another canned off-the-shelf *nix distro?

No choices have been removed, from the build process, nothing has been
taken away from the user. all that has changed is that the Gentoo
Handbook describes a Stage 3 installation, Stage 1 is still possible, the
instructions have been moved to the FAQ.

I have always done Stage 1 installs in the past, but my last install was
from Stage 3, because I needed the system working in less than two hours,
which it was. Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and
rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1, but with the
advantage of being able to do some work on the computer at the same time.
Unless I was doing something very specialised, I think I'll stick with
Stage 3 plus rebuild in future.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Deja Moo: The feeling that you heard this bull somewhere before.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Mark Knecht]

On 11/16/05, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and
> rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1

Neil,
   Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get
the equivalent of a Stage 1 install?

Thanks,
Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 750 bytes --]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:03:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> > Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and
> > rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1
> 
> Neil,
>    Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get
> the equivalent of a Stage 1 install?

When installing a stage 3 you are using packages compiled with the
default compiler and USE flags. All I did was set them up as I wanted and
rebuilt everything with emerge -e world. The specific change I made in
this case was changing -mcpu to G4 and adding -fomit-frame-pointer, which
may be unnecessary. But that's not relevant, the emerge -e world is.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

CONGRSS.SYS corruptd... Re-boot Washington D.C? (Y/N)

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Allan Gottlieb]

At Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:23:46 +0000 Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:03:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>>    Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get
>> the equivalent of a Stage 1 install?
>
> When installing a stage 3 you are using packages compiled with the
> default compiler and USE flags. All I did was set them up as I wanted and
> rebuilt everything with emerge -e world. The specific change I made in
> this case was changing -mcpu to G4 and adding -fomit-frame-pointer, which
> may be unnecessary. But that's not relevant, the emerge -e world is.

What about -march ?  At one point that was something that you weren't
supposed to change unless using stage1.  If one changes -march after
stage3, are we supposed to first run bootstrap.sh before emerge -e ?

Although I always did stage1 installs, I must confess to once getting
into trouble by changing USE flags "too early".  This taught me the
advantage of first going stage1-->stage2-->stage3 with the std USE
flags and only then changing USE flags.  I realize that in that case
one might as well start with stage3 (assuming you can change -march).

thanks,
allan
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 633 bytes --]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:52:47 -0500, Allan Gottlieb wrote:

> What about -march ?  At one point that was something that you weren't
> supposed to change unless using stage1.  If one changes -march after
> stage3, are we supposed to first run bootstrap.sh before emerge -e ?

There's no problem with changing -march, you're thinking of changing
CHOST, which can break things. The answer is to run fix_libtool_files.sh
after changing CHOST. I didn't change CHOST on this machine, because
there is only one possible setting for it.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Time is an illusion but never so much as whem you're using a modem.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Allan Gottlieb]

At Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:35:27 +0000 Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:52:47 -0500, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
>
>> What about -march ?  At one point that was something that you weren't
>> supposed to change unless using stage1.  If one changes -march after
>> stage3, are we supposed to first run bootstrap.sh before emerge -e ?
>
> There's no problem with changing -march, you're thinking of changing
> CHOST, which can break things. The answer is to run fix_libtool_files.sh
> after changing CHOST. I didn't change CHOST on this machine, because
> there is only one possible setting for it.

You are correct, I meant CHOST.  Seeing your answer, I now realize
why, unless one is changing bootstrap.sh, there is no need to do a
stage1 compile.

thank you,
allan
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Mark Knecht]

On 11/17/05, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:03:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
> > > Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and
> > > rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1
> >
> > Neil,
> >    Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get
> > the equivalent of a Stage 1 install?
>
> When installing a stage 3 you are using packages compiled with the
> default compiler and USE flags. All I did was set them up as I wanted and
> rebuilt everything with emerge -e world. The specific change I made in
> this case was changing -mcpu to G4 and adding -fomit-frame-pointer, which
> may be unnecessary. But that's not relevant, the emerge -e world is.
>

Thanks Neil.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1280 bytes --]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:44:49 +0000 jarmstrong@wi.rr.com wrote:
| I use Gentoo to run all my boxen and I love it.  That being said, I
| have ALWAYS done a stage1 install.  Never had a single problem I
| couldn't fix. Then, suddenly, they switched everything to stage3 and
| removed a LOT of options from the Gentoo build process.

Pff, no we didn't. You can still do a stage1 if you really want to, but
it's no longer necessary.

See, stage1s exist because when stages were built with stager, using a
stage1 was the only way to get a complete correct vdb. These days we
use catalyst, not stager, and even stage3s come with a correct vdb.
There's no longer a need for a stage1.

If you still want all the choice, which is entirely reasonable for some
people, then install from a stage3, customise whatever you want and
then do emerge -e world twice. You'll get the same end result, and not
have all the problems with circular dependencies.

[ Note: looks like I'm missing half this thread because certain
jackasses are posting HTML messages to the list. You'd think people
would've learned by now... ]

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Look! Shiny things!)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Richard Fish]

On 11/16/05, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> [ Note: looks like I'm missing half this thread because certain
> jackasses are posting HTML messages to the list. You'd think people
> would've learned by now... ]

We've tried educating about the evils of HTML (and top-posting).  It
always degenerates into a flame war.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Nick Rout]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500
Derek Tracy wrote:

> Part way through the online handbook I noticed that
> they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers
> thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.

I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the
handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook
stuck to stage 3.  (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on
other architectures).

Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook:

"Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore."

WTF? When did this happen?

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[kashani]

Nick Rout wrote:
> I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the 
> handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1
> handbook stuck to stage 3.  (Talking x86 here, I have never done an
> instal on other architectures).
> 
> Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook:
> 
> "Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a
> stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore."
> 
> WTF? When did this happen?
> 

About a week or two ago and was heavily discussed on gentoo-doc IIRC. 
Here's a rough summary.

stage1 is the cause of a number of circular dependency issues, it takes 
forever, the engineering and release team spends too much time on it, 
and the average Gentoo users get no benefit from doing a stage1 over a 
stage3. In order to get any benefit from stage1 you must edit the boot 
strap scripts in some way. Editting the boot strap scripts is not 
documented and not something general users should be mucking around in 
so we're going to drop everything, but stage3 on the CD.

Or at least that was my interpretation. I stopped paying attention 
around this point, but there was talk of keeping a stage1 for devs or 
people who need it... though I don't think exactly what or where was 
ever fully hashed out.

kashani
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Nick Rout]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 14:30:28 -0600
kashani wrote:

> Nick Rout wrote:
> > I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the 
> > handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1
> > handbook stuck to stage 3.  (Talking x86 here, I have never done an
> > instal on other architectures).
> > 
> > Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook:
> > 
> > "Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a
> > stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore."
> > 
> > WTF? When did this happen?
> > 
> 
> About a week or two ago and was heavily discussed on gentoo-doc IIRC. 
> Here's a rough summary.
> 
> stage1 is the cause of a number of circular dependency issues, it takes 
> forever, the engineering and release team spends too much time on it, 
> and the average Gentoo users get no benefit from doing a stage1 over a 
> stage3. In order to get any benefit from stage1 you must edit the boot 
> strap scripts in some way. Editting the boot strap scripts is not 
> documented and not something general users should be mucking around in 
> so we're going to drop everything, but stage3 on the CD.
> 
> Or at least that was my interpretation. I stopped paying attention 
> around this point, but there was talk of keeping a stage1 for devs or 
> people who need it... though I don't think exactly what or where was 
> ever fully hashed out.
> 
> kashani

Thanks for the info.

I have only used stage 1 once, and it was for an i586 machine (FYI an
epia eden (http://gentoo-wiki.com/Safe_Cflags#Eden_C3.2FEzra_.28Via_EPIA.29)

This is because there weren't stage 3's available for i586, so I had to
compile the lot from stage 1 (at least as i read the instructions at
that point).

Frankly I think that a stage 3 is ok 99% of the time, I am just
surprised to see gentoo limiting choices, even for the other 1%.
I am also surprised that it wasn't given wider publicity in the lead up
to the change - this sort of thing should be referred to this list IMHO. This list is high enough volume without having to sub to gentoo-doc as
well to pick up important changes.

> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Benjamin Martin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 963 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:12, Nick Rout wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500
>
> Derek Tracy wrote:
> > Part way through the online handbook I noticed that
> > they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers
> > thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.
>
> I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the
> handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook
> stuck to stage 3.  (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on
> other architectures).
>
> Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook:
>
> "Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or
> stage2 tarball are not supported anymore."

To be honest, this is the first time i see this. I always did stage 1 
installs. Haven't done so in a while that's why I'm a little surprised about 
this.
What exactly were the reasons for such a move?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Mark Knecht]

On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin <outrage@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:12, Nick Rout wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500
> >
> > Derek Tracy wrote:
> > > Part way through the online handbook I noticed that
> > > they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers
> > > thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.
> >
> > I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the
> > handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook
> > stuck to stage 3.  (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on
> > other architectures).
> >
> > Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook:
> >
> > "Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or
> > stage2 tarball are not supported anymore."
>
> To be honest, this is the first time i see this. I always did stage 1
> installs. Haven't done so in a while that's why I'm a little surprised about
> this.
> What exactly were the reasons for such a move?

I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot
say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install
most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks.
Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1
allows me to get the machine up and running sooner.

Just my take on the question.

Cheers,
Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Benjamin Martin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 879 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote:
> I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot
> say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install
> most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks.
> Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1
> allows me to get the machine up and running sooner.
>
> Just my take on the question.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark

True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set up  
server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the installation 
is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I don't 
really touch it except for security related updates.
Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an option 
doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Derek Tracy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1104 bytes --]

I couldn't have said it better myself.

On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin <outrage@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote:
> > I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot
> > say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install
> > most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks.
> > Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1
> > allows me to get the machine up and running sooner.
> >
> > Just my take on the question.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mark
>
> True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set
> up
> server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the
> installation
> is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I
> don't
> really touch it except for security related updates.
> Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an
> option
> doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me.
>
>
>


--
---------------------------------
Derek Tracy
tracyde@gmail.com
---------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1494 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Mark Knecht]

On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin <outrage@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote:
> > I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot
> > say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install
> > most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks.
> > Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1
> > allows me to get the machine up and running sooner.
> >
> > Just my take on the question.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mark
>
> True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set up
> server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the installation
> is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I don't
> really touch it except for security related updates.
> Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an option
> doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me.

Good points. I agree it doesn't seem like the Gentoo way to remove
options, however, in response to Derek's original point about rising
or fallign numbers of Gentoo new users it might be wise to make the
default install Stage 3, thus making the newest users most likely more
successful, and then create some (not so obvious) option to allow
folks like you that have good reasons to do Stage 1 if they want it.

I know not what I speak of as I cannot even imagine anymore why I'd
want to do a Stage 1 install, but I do assume all that work must have
some value to others.

Take care,
Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Derek Tracy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2286 bytes --]

I also want to reiterate that if they are going to make a Stage3 install the
default then make it a rock solid release. And in my opinion portage needs
to be pruned not only of un-maintained packages but also of packages that
conflict with others.

Like I said before a Stable tree should be just that Stable. There is no
reason someone should have to completely change to the Unstable branch when
all of the programs that he / she wants are marked stable for that arch.

On 11/16/05, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin <outrage@gmx.net> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote:
> > > I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot
> > > say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install
> > > most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks.
> > > Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1
> > > allows me to get the machine up and running sooner.
> > >
> > > Just my take on the question.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Mark
> >
> > True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I
> set up
> > server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the
> installation
> > is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I
> don't
> > really touch it except for security related updates.
> > Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an
> option
> > doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me.
>
> Good points. I agree it doesn't seem like the Gentoo way to remove
> options, however, in response to Derek's original point about rising
> or fallign numbers of Gentoo new users it might be wise to make the
> default install Stage 3, thus making the newest users most likely more
> successful, and then create some (not so obvious) option to allow
> folks like you that have good reasons to do Stage 1 if they want it.
>
> I know not what I speak of as I cannot even imagine anymore why I'd
> want to do a Stage 1 install, but I do assume all that work must have
> some value to others.
>
> Take care,
> Mark
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
---------------------------------
Derek Tracy
tracyde@gmail.com
---------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2872 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Richard Fish]

On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
> I also want to reiterate that if they are going to make a Stage3 install the
> default then make it a rock solid release.  And in my opinion portage needs
> to be pruned not only of un-maintained packages but also of packages that
> conflict with others.

What conflicts?  Please be specific.

The best would be to report any such conflicts to bugs.gentoo.org. 
The gentoo developers do not have the time to test every possible
combination of packages.  So they test what they can, and rely on us
to tell them when problems arise.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[kashani]

Derek Tracy wrote:
> I also want to reiterate that if they are going to make a Stage3 install 
> the default then make it a rock solid release.  And in my opinion 
> portage needs to be pruned not only of un-maintained packages but also 
> of packages that conflict with others. 
> 
> Like I said before a Stable tree should be just that Stable.  There is 
> no reason someone should have to completely change to the Unstable 
> branch when all of the programs that he / she wants are marked stable 
> for that arch.

	My understanding is that you're way more likely to have issues starting 
from a stage1, I know I have. Moving general users to stage3 is an 
attempt to eliminate variables and streamline the testing that goes into 
a release. By streamlining the testing you can increase the actual 
amount of testing you can do without increasing the overhead.

kashani
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Manuel McLure]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> Good points. I agree it doesn't seem like the Gentoo way to remove
> options, however, in response to Derek's original point about rising
> or fallign numbers of Gentoo new users it might be wise to make the
> default install Stage 3, thus making the newest users most likely more
> successful, and then create some (not so obvious) option to allow
> folks like you that have good reasons to do Stage 1 if they want it.
> 
> I know not what I speak of as I cannot even imagine anymore why I'd
> want to do a Stage 1 install, but I do assume all that work must have
> some value to others.

It appears that you can still do the equivalent of a Stage 1 install 
using the Stage 3 tarball - the Handbook points to 
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/faq.xml#stage12 which has instructions on 
how to re-bootstrap the system and rebuild with new compiler flags.

-- 
Manuel A. McLure KE6TAW <manuel@mclure.org> <http://www.mclure.org>
...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law,
no man may kill a cat.                       -- H.P. Lovecraft
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Jeff Smelser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 673 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:55 pm, Benjamin Martin wrote:

> True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set
> up server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the
> installation is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to
> do and I don't really touch it except for security related updates.
> Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an option
> doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me.

They are not taking it away. They just dont support it, big difference..

We just went through all this not a few weeks ago, why are we going through 
this again?

Jeff

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Zac Medico]

Nick Rout wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500
> Derek Tracy wrote:
> 
> 
>>Part way through the online handbook I noticed that
>>they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers
>>thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.
> 
> 
> I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the
> handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook
> stuck to stage 3.  (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on
> other architectures).
> 
> Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook:
> 
> "Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore."
> 
> WTF? When did this happen?
> 

The archived thread from the gentoo-releng list:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.releng/333

Note that it's not terribly difficult to use catalyst to build a stage1 from a stage3:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/releng/catalyst/2.x/reference.xml

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Richard Fish]

On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
> When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should
> work,

I'm not sure this is always possible.  Much of your complaint comes
from the ipw2200 driver, which is new in 2.6.14.  But the in-kernel
version is several versions older than the external driver.  So should
2.6.14 remain marked as unstable because of this one driver that works
for some people, but not for others?  Or because a specific externally
maintained driver or package doesn't build against it?

On my system, either the in-kernel or external drivers work fine.  The
only caveat is that I need firmware version 2.2 with the in-kernel
drivers, and a different version for the external.  If I am using the
external version, the portage dependancy tree makes sure I have the
right version of the firmware.  But the kernel sources do not (and
should not) depend upon the ipw2200-firmware package, so this is a
case where I need to know the driver requirements.  (Also, the kernel
help specifies that the driver requires external firmware, although it
doesn't specify what version.)

Regarding the X.org issue, without an Xorg.0.log file, it is really
impossible to say what the problem there is.  It could be something as
simple as your kernel configuration; for example leaving out I2C or
AGP support could cause this.

But in my view, you cannot take an existing xorg.conf file and expect
it to work without any issues _without_ duplicating the same system
configuration (kernel version, kernel config, and nvidia driver
version).  The fastest method of configuring X on a new system is to
run "X -configure", test the resulting configuration, and use that
xorg.conf file.  Yes, this would use the opensource x.org Nv driver,
but it should definitely work for getting X up and running.  If this
doesn't work, then you have reason to complain.

If the proprietary nvidia driver doesn't work with a particular kernel
version, you can only complain to nvidia.

I'm quite sure a binary-based distribution would have worked better
for you in this case, only because nothing would have been upgraded or
changed.  Everything that worked before would have continued to work,
just like everything that was broken before would have continued to be
broken.  It is the price of progress, IMO.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Derek Tracy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3148 bytes --]

On 11/16/05, Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:
>
> On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
> > When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should
> > work,
>
> I'm not sure this is always possible. Much of your complaint comes
> from the ipw2200 driver, which is new in 2.6.14. But the in-kernel
> version is several versions older than the external driver. So should
> 2.6.14 remain marked as unstable because of this one driver that works
> for some people, but not for others? Or because a specific externally
> maintained driver or package doesn't build against it?
>
> On my system, either the in-kernel or external drivers work fine. The
> only caveat is that I need firmware version 2.2 with the in-kernel
> drivers, and a different version for the external. If I am using the
> external version, the portage dependancy tree makes sure I have the
> right version of the firmware. But the kernel sources do not (and
> should not) depend upon the ipw2200-firmware package, so this is a
> case where I need to know the driver requirements. (Also, the kernel
> help specifies that the driver requires external firmware, although it
> doesn't specify what version.)


What I am complaining about is that neither of the drivers will work.

Regarding the X.org <http://X.org> issue, without an Xorg.0.log file, it is
> really
> impossible to say what the problem there is. It could be something as
> simple as your kernel configuration; for example leaving out I2C or
> AGP support could cause this.
>
> But in my view, you cannot take an existing xorg.conf file and expect
> it to work without any issues _without_ duplicating the same system
> configuration (kernel version, kernel config, and nvidia driver
> version). The fastest method of configuring X on a new system is to
> run "X -configure", test the resulting configuration, and use that
> xorg.conf file. Yes, this would use the opensource x.org <http://x.org> Nv
> driver,
> but it should definitely work for getting X up and running. If this
> doesn't work, then you have reason to complain.


I have tried both ways. My reasoning for taking my old config was originally
for the Modeline info. The only reason that I arbitrarily threw it into the
newly built system was because the X -configure did not work (even after I
switched the dev/mouse to /dev/input/mice) I get the same error with both of
the configs.

If the proprietary nvidia driver doesn't work with a particular kernel
> version, you can only complain to nvidia.


I have had that happen in the past and would not ever think about blaming
the Gentoo Developers for NVidias work.

I'm quite sure a binary-based distribution would have worked better
> for you in this case, only because nothing would have been upgraded or
> changed. Everything that worked before would have continued to work,
> just like everything that was broken before would have continued to be
> broken. It is the price of progress, IMO.
>
> -Richard
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
---------------------------------
Derek Tracy
tracyde@gmail.com
---------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4345 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Richard Fish]

On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy <tracyde@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I am complaining about is that neither of the drivers will work.

What doesn't work?  Does the module build?  Does it load?  What errors
do you get?  Does it work if you run the same kernel version and
driver you used before?

If the combination of a specific kernel version and driver doesn't
work with your card, report it via bugs.gentoo.org (and preferably
also the ipw2200 bug tracker).

> I have tried both ways.  My reasoning for taking my old config was
> originally for the Modeline info.  The only reason that I arbitrarily threw
> it into the newly built system was because the X  -configure did not work
> (even after I switched the dev/mouse to /dev/input/mice)  I get the same
> error with both of the configs.

Post the /var/log/xorg.0.log file with the error (in a new thread
please!), so we can help figure out what the problem is.  Lots of
people are using nvidia graphics boards with Gentoo, with the
proprietary drivers, so in the absence of any actual data, the
assumption has to be it is something specific with your configuration.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Bill Roberts]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3493 bytes --]

On 11:20 Wed 16 Nov     , Derek Tracy wrote:
>    After restarting I noticed that ipw2200 did not load properly was posted
>    in my boot mesg WTF.  I distinctly remembered during the install that I
>    waited until after I installed the kernel, then I went ahead and installed
>    the external modules.  (NOTE: I did not use the built in kernel modules
>    for ipw2200 or ieee80211 I had read too many horror stories about
>    incompatible versions of ipw2200-firmware and I have always had good luck
>    with the external drivers)  One other thing, instead of going for pure on
>    the edge goodness of using a Nitro-esque kernel (one optimized for speed
>    over stability) I decided to use Gentoo-sources again trusting the
>    developers judgement.  After searching through tons of articles regarding
>    ipw2200 drivers not working with the latest "Stable" Gentoo-Sources I
>    decided to go with the kernel drivers and give them a shot.  I recompiled
>    rebooted and low and behold the drivers still weren't working.  After
>    trying all sorts of different combinations Unstable versions of this
>    stable versions of that.  Nothing worked, so I proceeded to reboot back
>    into the livecd and re-chroot into my system so I could get a network
>    connection and install the Madwifi Drivers, for a pcmcia card that I have
>    laying around.  Also note that the Madwifi drivers are considered
>    Unstable.  I rebooted the computer and the drivers actually worked (Yea
>    Unstable).  So I got the network connection up, then I decided to go ahead
>    and install X (I thought that it would be easier to troubleshoot the ipw
>    drivers from a graphical environment copy, paste, multiple xterms.).  Well

Maybe this will help a little. I am using the ipw2200 drivers, and they
work fine. I am using the gentoo-sources kernel, 2.6.13-r4, with
ipw2200-1.0.6-r3. My eix shows ipw2200-firmware 2.3 and 2.4 installed (I
guess they are slotted), I'm not sure which one is being loaded. I tried
upgrading to 2.6.14, wireless broke (I think that's when I tried loading
the 2.4 firmware), so I went back to my current kernel. I'll hang out here
for a while, 'til they get the bugs worked out of 2.6.14.

I have an ati video, so no help there.

My intial approach to my new laptop was a bit different than yours. Though
I've been doing Gentoo three years, I've never done it on a laptop, never
done Linux or wireless on a laptop. I've had good luck with Ubuntu, wanted
to try their newest, so I loaded it up first, to get info on hardware, get
a working xorg.conf, etc. Had a fully functional laptop in less than an
hour.

I then set up a dual boot gentoo, used the xorg.conf from Ubuntu,
cherry-picked a few ideas from the nicely done Ubuntu. I've added
additional functionality to my Gentoo build as I've needed it. So now,
every time I fire up, I always have a choice. I can use the fully loaded
Ubuntu, which I love for its ease of installation and administration, or I
can use Gentoo, my stripped down hot rod, which on occasion gives me fits.
Gentoo gets the nod every time, unless I'm looking for a bit of freecell.
Why?, I ask myself. I think it's the same reason I liked to take watches
apart when I was a kid. I want to know how things work. I love the Zen-like
aesthetic, starting with a blank slate, and adding only what is absolutely
essential. No cruft.

It's not for everyone, and it's not the "only true way". But it works for
me.

Good Luck

Bill Roberts

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

RE: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?

[Budd, Tracy]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Rout  
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 3:12 PM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
> 
> 
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500
> Derek Tracy wrote:
> 
> > Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they 
> standardized 
> > the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers 
> thought it was 
> > best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.
> 
> I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I 
> read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and 
> the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3.  (Talking x86 here, I 
> have never done an instal on other architectures).
> 
> Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook:
> 
> "Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations 
> using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore."
> 
> WTF? When did this happen?
> 
> --
> Nick Rout 
> 
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 
This one caught me off guard as well. I am used to installing from a
stage 1 tarball. When I recently installed to my new AMD64 machine, I
was surprised to see this was no longer covered in the handbook. It was
easily fixed with an emerge system though.
-tracy

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list