[gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Shaochun Wang]

Is Gentoo Weekly Newsletter dead? The most recent update is 15 Oct,
2007. 

What happened in Gentoo community?

-- 
Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn>

Jabber:	fungusw@jabber.org
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Daniel Pielmeier]

2008/1/11, Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn>:
> Is Gentoo Weekly Newsletter dead? The most recent update is 15 Oct,
> 2007.
>
> What happened in Gentoo community?

There is currently a discussion on gentoo-dev. It looks like it will
be changed to a GMN (Gentoo Monthly Newsletter) due to the lack of
contributions.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Pongracz Istvan]

2008. 01. 11, péntek keltezéssel 09.37-kor Daniel Pielmeier ezt írta:
> 2008/1/11, Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn>:
> > Is Gentoo Weekly Newsletter dead? The most recent update is 15 Oct,
> > 2007.
> >
> > What happened in Gentoo community?
> 
> There is currently a discussion on gentoo-dev. It looks like it will
> be changed to a GMN (Gentoo Monthly Newsletter) due to the lack of
> contributions.

<joke>

	Or they will change to GYN (Gentoo Yearly Newsletter)
	:)

</joke>

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Shaochun Wang]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:58:16AM +0100, Pongracz Istvan wrote:
> 
> 2008. 01. 11, p茅ntek keltez茅ssel 09.37-kor Daniel Pielmeier ezt 铆rta:
> <joke>
> 
> 	Or they will change to GYN (Gentoo Yearly Newsletter)
> 	:)
> 
> </joke>
> 

Maybe you joke will become the truth. Currently, Gentoo has not updated
its installation CD for a long time!

-- 
Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn>

Jabber:	fungusw@jabber.org
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 11 January 2008, Shaochun Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:58:16AM +0100, Pongracz Istvan wrote:
> > 2008. 01. 11, p茅ntek keltez茅ssel 09.37-kor Daniel Pielmeier ezt
> > 铆rta: <joke>
> >
> > 	Or they will change to GYN (Gentoo Yearly Newsletter)
> >
> > 	:)
> >
> > </joke>
>
> Maybe you joke will become the truth. Currently, Gentoo has not
> updated its installation CD for a long time!

Why do you think gentoo *needs* to update it's install CD?


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Iain Buchanan]

On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 11:22 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Friday 11 January 2008, Shaochun Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:58:16AM +0100, Pongracz Istvan wrote:
> > > 2008. 01. 11, p茅ntek keltez茅ssel 09.37-kor Daniel Pielmeier ezt
> > > 铆rta: <joke>
> > >
> > > 	Or they will change to GYN (Gentoo Yearly Newsletter)
> > >
> > > 	:)
> > >
> > > </joke>
> >
> > Maybe you joke will become the truth. Currently, Gentoo has not
> > updated its installation CD for a long time!
> 
> Why do you think gentoo *needs* to update it's install CD?

The official release is an indication of the life of a distribution or
package.  Look at one of Keith Packard's reasons for leaving Xfree86
(slow release cycle), or Gnome's recent push to speed their release
cycle.

I know that I can still use the latest install CD, and do an update.
However, the install CD is only one indication of Gentoo's problems.
The out of date website, the newsletter releases, the sad responses to
the "how are we doing" question on gentoo-dev...  Anyway I digress...

-- 
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>

Real computer scientists like having a computer on their desk, else how
could they read their mail?

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Walter Dnes]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 11:42:35AM +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote

> The official release is an indication of the life of a distribution
> or package.  Look at one of Keith Packard's reasons for leaving
> Xfree86 (slow release cycle), or Gnome's recent push to speed their
> release cycle.

  One, of several, reason I left Windows in 2001 was...
1995 Windows95
1996 Windows95 OSr2
1998 Windows98
1999 Windows98SE
2000 Windows ME and Windows2000
2001 WindowsXP
..and I believed MS when they said Vista was "real soon now"<g>.

  I don't use linux to install linux, I use linux as a tool to do email,
spreadsheets, web surfing, etc.  And I've got nothing on businesses.
They don't want their high-paid admins constantly spending their time
installing "the latest and greatest".  Businesses want to "set it and
forget it".  A few data points...

in the leadup to Y2K, there were a lot of mainframe/mini programs
replaced that had been running unmodified for 10 or 20 years

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/04/12/missing_novell_server_discovered_after/
tells about a university where a wall was built that happened to
imprison a server.  It kept happily chugging away, and it wasn't until 4
years later, during an audit, that it was finally tracked down, by
following the network cabling

one of Redhat's selling points with Redhat Enterprise Linux is the
promise of a slower release cycle.  Timely security patches, yes.  But OS
version du jour, NO.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X Window user...  I'm an ex-Windows-user
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Daniel Pielmeier]

2008/1/11, Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn>:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:58:16AM +0100, Pongracz Istvan wrote:
> >
> > 2008. 01. 11, p茅ntek keltez茅ssel 09.37-kor Daniel Pielmeier ezt 铆rta:
> > <joke>
> >
> >       Or they will change to GYN (Gentoo Yearly Newsletter)
> >       :)
> >
> > </joke>
> >
>
> Maybe you joke will become the truth. Currently, Gentoo has not updated
> its installation CD for a long time!
>

You can use other means of information, join gentoo-dev or the forums
for example to get informed.

Gentoo does not need any kind of installation CD. You can use other
Live CD's for installing Gentoo if you have hardware which is not
supported by the latest Gentoo Release. Just for updating your
installation there is no need for any installation media, execpt you
do not have a proper internet-connection. So just sync and update!

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

Daniel Pielmeier <daniel.pielmeier@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Gentoo does not need any kind of installation CD. You can use other
> Live CD's for installing Gentoo if you have hardware which is not
> supported by the latest Gentoo Release.

Absolutely correct! It would be good, though, if "them Gentoo folks"
would point to other Live CDs (like GRML or whatever) on the 
appropriate places. At is right now, people might (IMO) rightfully
think, that the only way to install Gentoo is with the help of a Gentoo
install CD, as that's what's linked to in the documentation.

Michael

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Install CD (was: Is GWN dead?)

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 698 bytes --]

Am Freitag, 11. Januar 2008 schrieb ext Michael Schmarck:
> It would be good, though, if "them Gentoo folks"
> would point to other Live CDs (like GRML or whatever) on the
> appropriate places.

They do. The "Alternative Installation Guide" is mentioned and linked in 
the "Gentoo Handbook", Chapter 1.

Isn't that an appropriate place?

Bye...

	Dirk
-- 
Dirk Heinrichs          | Tel:  +49 (0)162 234 3408
Configuration Manager   | Fax:  +49 (0)211 47068 111
Capgemini Deutschland   | Mail: dirk.heinrichs@capgemini.com
Wanheimerstraße 68      | Web:  http://www.capgemini.com
D-40468 Düsseldorf      | ICQ#: 110037733
GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: www.keyserver.net

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 574 bytes --]

Am Freitag, 11. Januar 2008 schrieb ext Shaochun Wang:

> Currently, Gentoo has not updated
> its installation CD for a long time!

They don't need to. One week ago I used a GRML cd to install a new Gentoo 
system.

Bye...

	Dirk
-- 
Dirk Heinrichs          | Tel:  +49 (0)162 234 3408
Configuration Manager   | Fax:  +49 (0)211 47068 111
Capgemini Deutschland   | Mail: dirk.heinrichs@capgemini.com
Wanheimerstraße 68      | Web:  http://www.capgemini.com
D-40468 Düsseldorf      | ICQ#: 110037733
GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: www.keyserver.net

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 328 bytes --]

Dirk Heinrichs wrote:
> Am Freitag, 11. Januar 2008 schrieb ext Shaochun Wang:
>
>   
>> Currently, Gentoo has not updated
>> its installation CD for a long time!
>>     
>
> They don't need to. One week ago I used a GRML cd to install a new Gentoo 
> system.
>
> Bye...
>
> 	Dirk
>   

Knoppix will work too. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 770 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 11, 2008 10:38 AM, Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs.ext@nsn.com> wrote:
> Am Freitag, 11. Januar 2008 schrieb ext Shaochun Wang:
>
> > Currently, Gentoo has not updated
> > its installation CD for a long time!
>
> They don't need to. One week ago I used a GRML cd to install a new Gentoo
> system.

&

On Jan 11, 2008 10:22 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why do you think gentoo *needs* to update it's install CD?

Because Gentoo is a distro, and as a distro, it should have a way to
be installed on a computer... I upgraded my hardware recently and my
previous gentoo distro was not able to boot (ICH9 + JMicron
controller) because no SATA HD was recognized with my old 2.6.18
kernel.... the only way to boot was livecd with right kernel/modules.
But Gentoo was not able to provide a *so basic feature*, the one that
let me boot on my computer.... and you see no needs with that ? Well,
if Gentoo is not able to make my computer booting, it is sure that I
have no need to get maintained portage nor any one of the ebuilds...

To fix my problem, I had a look at other distro LiveCD, but had a too
old kernel inside, then fell back to a custom-made Gentoo LiveCD found
on the gentoo forums.

Maybe *YOU* don't have the need to spend hours looking for an
installCD/LiveCD, but it is a true one for lots of people that faced
this problem. What Gentoo have to tell to these people ? Let's get to
hell since Gentoo installCD is outdated ?

You can say that devs have no time to make it, but please, don't tell
that Gentoo doesn't need any installCD (outdated means no CD at all
for many computers nowaday).

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 11 January 2008, Galevsky wrote:
> You can say that devs have no time to make it, but please, don't tell
> that Gentoo doesn't need any installCD (outdated means no CD at all
> for many computers nowaday).

Please tell me where I said any such thing.

I'll give you a clue - I didn't. I asked you why you think the install 
CD needs updated.

Apparently your answer to that is that you have a ICH9 machine. That's 
fine, it's reasonable to need that supported on the BootCD. Was it 
really necessary to take out your frustrations/whatever with the 
installer on me on a public mailing list? Hmmm?

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1279 bytes --]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Friday 11 January 2008, Galevsky wrote:
>   
>> You can say that devs have no time to make it, but please, don't tell
>> that Gentoo doesn't need any installCD (outdated means no CD at all
>> for many computers nowaday).
>>     
>
> Please tell me where I said any such thing.
>
> I'll give you a clue - I didn't. I asked you why you think the install 
> CD needs updated.
>
> Apparently your answer to that is that you have a ICH9 machine. That's 
> fine, it's reasonable to need that supported on the BootCD. Was it 
> really necessary to take out your frustrations/whatever with the 
> installer on me on a public mailing list? Hmmm?
>
>   

Isn't it true that not everything can be supported anyway?  The CD can
hold only so much data before it runs out of space.  I suspect that some
older hardware is not included to make room for more recent hardware.

Also, at the rate things comes out, a new CD would have to be made every
few months to keep up.  From what I have read on -dev, it is harder to
make the CD than some realize.  They have a lot to consider on what to
include and what to leave out.

To clarify, I am talking about the CD that includes distfiles and a
snapshot.  The minimal CD and DVD is a separate matter.

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-) 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1761 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

On Jan 11, 2008 10:38 AM, Dale <dalek1967@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>  Alan McKinnon wrote:
>  On Friday 11 January 2008, Galevsky wrote:
>
>
>  You can say that devs have no time to make it, but please, don't tell
> that Gentoo doesn't need any installCD (outdated means no CD at all
> for many computers nowaday).
>
>  Please tell me where I said any such thing.
>
> I'll give you a clue - I didn't. I asked you why you think the install
> CD needs updated.
>
> Apparently your answer to that is that you have a ICH9 machine. That's
> fine, it's reasonable to need that supported on the BootCD. Was it
> really necessary to take out your frustrations/whatever with the
> installer on me on a public mailing list? Hmmm?
>
>
>
>  Isn't it true that not everything can be supported anyway?  The CD can hold
> only so much data before it runs out of space.  I suspect that some older
> hardware is not included to make room for more recent hardware.
>
>  Also, at the rate things comes out, a new CD would have to be made every
> few months to keep up.  From what I have read on -dev, it is harder to make
> the CD than some realize.  They have a lot to consider on what to include
> and what to leave out.
>
>  To clarify, I am talking about the CD that includes distfiles and a
> snapshot.  The minimal CD and DVD is a separate matter.
>
>  Dale

I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client cannot
render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people on the list
have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post in plain text,
at least in this list.

Thanks
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

Qian Qiao wrote:
>
> I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client cannot
> render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people on the list
> have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post in plain text,
> at least in this list.
>
> Thanks
>   

I have it set to send it text for this domain.  Is it not sending in
plain text?  I have the same settings for other mailing lists as well.

Thanks for pointing it out if it is not sending plain text tho.

Dale



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 897 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 11 January 2008, Dale wrote:
> Qian Qiao wrote:
> > I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client
> > cannot render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people
> > on the list have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post
> > in plain text, at least in this list.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> I have it set to send it text for this domain.  Is it not sending in
> plain text?  I have the same settings for other mailing lists as
> well.
>
> Thanks for pointing it out if it is not sending plain text tho.

It's sent multipart, so the pure text can be used alone for users like 
Qian Qiao. That's how I've set up my kmail (I can view it as html if I 
wish)

To be honest, it's not really a big deal for a list like this. The text 
is 492 bytes, the html is 867 bytes and the whole thing is 4.5k

In other words, the text and html *together* are still smaller than the 
headers :-)

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

On Jan 11, 2008 1:46 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It's sent multipart, so the pure text can be used alone for users like
> Qian Qiao. That's how I've set up my kmail (I can view it as html if I
> wish)
>
> To be honest, it's not really a big deal for a list like this. The text
> is 492 bytes, the html is 867 bytes and the whole thing is 4.5k
>
> In other words, the text and html *together* are still smaller than the
> headers :-)

I can view you messages as plain text fine, but not Dales, might be
something on my part, will have a loot.

-- Joe
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1353 bytes --]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Friday 11 January 2008, Dale wrote:
>   
>> Qian Qiao wrote:
>>     
>>> I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client
>>> cannot render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people
>>> on the list have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post
>>> in plain text, at least in this list.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>       
>> I have it set to send it text for this domain.  Is it not sending in
>> plain text?  I have the same settings for other mailing lists as
>> well.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing it out if it is not sending plain text tho.
>>     
>
> It's sent multipart, so the pure text can be used alone for users like 
> Qian Qiao. That's how I've set up my kmail (I can view it as html if I 
> wish)
>
> To be honest, it's not really a big deal for a list like this. The text 
> is 492 bytes, the html is 867 bytes and the whole thing is 4.5k
>
> In other words, the text and html *together* are still smaller than the 
> headers :-)
>
>   

True, but I do try to "go with the flow" here.  I use Seamonkey for my
email.  I went to "Edit" and "Preferences" then chose "Send formats".  I
place gentoo.org in the text only section.  What else can I do to make
sure it sends it correctly?  I do prefer to send it text only since some
do use some strange email programs.

Thanks

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-) 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1874 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Hal Martin]

I'll keep that in mind when I am sending email to the list from
Thunderbird. I'm also aware that many corporations block HTML mail to
lower the risk of a staff member opening up an infected/laced email
(generally on a Windows computer) so text emails are more advantageous
in that regard.

Randy, why aren't you out here making sure everyone's mom is aware of
all the thread hijacking going on?


-Hal


Dale wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On Friday 11 January 2008, Dale wrote:
>>   
>>> Qian Qiao wrote:
>>>     
>>>> I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client
>>>> cannot render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people
>>>> on the list have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post
>>>> in plain text, at least in this list.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>       
>>> I have it set to send it text for this domain.  Is it not sending in
>>> plain text?  I have the same settings for other mailing lists as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> Thanks for pointing it out if it is not sending plain text tho.
>>>     
>>
>> It's sent multipart, so the pure text can be used alone for users like 
>> Qian Qiao. That's how I've set up my kmail (I can view it as html if I 
>> wish)
>>
>> To be honest, it's not really a big deal for a list like this. The text 
>> is 492 bytes, the html is 867 bytes and the whole thing is 4.5k
>>
>> In other words, the text and html *together* are still smaller than the 
>> headers :-)
>>
>>   
>
> True, but I do try to "go with the flow" here.  I use Seamonkey for my
> email.  I went to "Edit" and "Preferences" then chose "Send formats". 
> I place gentoo.org in the text only section.  What else can I do to
> make sure it sends it correctly?  I do prefer to send it text only
> since some do use some strange email programs.
>
> Thanks
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)  :-) 

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

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Qian Qiao]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hal Martin wrote:
> I'll keep that in mind when I am sending email to the list from
> Thunderbird. I'm also aware that many corporations block HTML mail to
> lower the risk of a staff member opening up an infected/laced email
> (generally on a Windows computer) so text emails are more advantageous
> in that regard.
> 
> Randy, why aren't you out here making sure everyone's mom is aware of
> all the thread hijacking going on?
> 
> 
> -Hal

I must apologize for hijacking the original thread, there was a couple
of messages from another list user that I had difficulties reading.

Now that we are all aware the matter, it is perhaps time to end the
discussion here.

- -- Joe


- --
A computer scientist is someone who, when told "go to hell", considers
the "go to" harmful rather than the destination.

GnuPG FP: DE08 57AE A1AD 620C 02AA  CCDD 611B 63AC B146 61D9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHiAjfYRtjrLFGYdkRAtU1AKC6ZTOe6OFcf7G/KbRnwyOSTA/+BACfTp/P
/fslG8D9wZcz4Mg8Fi0EEiA=
=vO6c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1312 bytes --]

On Saturday 12 January 2008, Hal Martin wrote:
> I'll keep that in mind when I am sending email to the list from
> Thunderbird. I'm also aware that many corporations block HTML mail to
> lower the risk of a staff member opening up an infected/laced email
> (generally on a Windows computer) so text emails are more advantageous
> in that regard.
>
> Randy, why aren't you out here making sure everyone's mom is aware of
> all the thread hijacking going on?

Hmm, he may be waiting for you to do it, while you're explaining to all these 
moms out there why you may think that top-posting in this ML would be 
considered good netiquette?  BTW, I'm not condoning thread hi-jacking 
either . . .

To Dale: have you tried setting up new addresses in the Seamonkey's Address 
Book with <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org> and <gentoo-user@gentoo.org> and for 
each of these select to only send plain text messages?

From previous threads I remember that you can send plain text when you respond 
to a plain text message in this ML, but not otherwise.  This could be that 
you do not have both addresses above set up to only send plain text format.

WARNING: I have not yet used Seamonkey, but vaguely remember something like 
this in the old Mozilla/Netscape features.

HTH.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Dale]

Mick wrote:
>
> Hmm, he may be waiting for you to do it, while you're explaining to all these 
> moms out there why you may think that top-posting in this ML would be 
> considered good netiquette?  BTW, I'm not condoning thread hi-jacking 
> either . . .
>
> To Dale: have you tried setting up new addresses in the Seamonkey's Address 
> Book with <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org> and <gentoo-user@gentoo.org> and for 
> each of these select to only send plain text messages?
>
> From previous threads I remember that you can send plain text when you respond 
> to a plain text message in this ML, but not otherwise.  This could be that 
> you do not have both addresses above set up to only send plain text format.
>
> WARNING: I have not yet used Seamonkey, but vaguely remember something like 
> this in the old Mozilla/Netscape features.
>
> HTH.
>   

Thanks.  I didn't know you could change that in the address book.  Can
you tell me how this one comes through?  It should be plain text,
hopefully only plain text.

Neat trick.  ;-) 

Dale

:-)  :-) 
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 305 bytes --]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 05:33:24 -0600, Dale wrote:

> Thanks.  I didn't know you could change that in the address book.  Can
> you tell me how this one comes through?  It should be plain text,
> hopefully only plain text.

It is :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Trekkers work out in the `He's Dead Gym'.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1610 bytes --]

On Saturday 12 January 2008, Dale wrote:
> Mick wrote:
> > Hmm, he may be waiting for you to do it, while you're explaining to all
> > these moms out there why you may think that top-posting in this ML would
> > be considered good netiquette?  BTW, I'm not condoning thread hi-jacking
> > either . . .
> >
> > To Dale: have you tried setting up new addresses in the Seamonkey's
> > Address Book with <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org> and
> > <gentoo-user@gentoo.org> and for each of these select to only send plain
> > text messages?
> >
> > From previous threads I remember that you can send plain text when you
> > respond to a plain text message in this ML, but not otherwise.  This
> > could be that you do not have both addresses above set up to only send
> > plain text format.
> >
> > WARNING: I have not yet used Seamonkey, but vaguely remember something
> > like this in the old Mozilla/Netscape features.
> >
> > HTH.
>
> Thanks.  I didn't know you could change that in the address book.  Can
> you tell me how this one comes through?  It should be plain text,
> hopefully only plain text.
>
> Neat trick.  ;-)

OK, this is plain text as I can see in the message headers:
=======================================
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset=ISO-8859-1
=======================================

. . . but you responded to a plain text message from the list, which as I 
recall you could always do.  The problem I believe is when you start a new 
message.  Email me off list with a new message and I will confirm if it is 
also plain text.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Dale]

Mick wrote:
> On Saturday 12 January 2008, Dale wrote:
>   
>>
>> Thanks.  I didn't know you could change that in the address book.  Can
>> you tell me how this one comes through?  It should be plain text,
>> hopefully only plain text.
>>
>> Neat trick.  ;-)
>>     
>
> OK, this is plain text as I can see in the message headers:
> =======================================
> Content-Type: text/plain;
>   charset=ISO-8859-1
> =======================================
>
> . . . but you responded to a plain text message from the list, which as I 
> recall you could always do.  The problem I believe is when you start a new 
> message.  Email me off list with a new message and I will confirm if it is 
> also plain text.
>   

But then it won't be to gentoo.org.  LOL  It may not work then.  ;-) 

I'll post something somewhere else.  Maybe someone will point out if it
is not plain text, I guess they will anyway.

Dale

:-)  :-)
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 676 bytes --]

On Saturday 12 January 2008, Dale wrote:
> Mick wrote:

> > . . . but you responded to a plain text message from the list, which as I
> > recall you could always do.  The problem I believe is when you start a
> > new message.  Email me off list with a new message and I will confirm if
> > it is also plain text.
>
> But then it won't be to gentoo.org.  LOL  It may not work then.  ;-)

Doh!  Still asleep . . .  :))

> I'll post something somewhere else.  Maybe someone will point out if it
> is not plain text, I guess they will anyway.

I'll keep an eye out then for any new threads of yours and flame you if it is 
html, ha, ha!  :))
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 323 bytes --]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:35:22 -0600, Dale wrote:

> I have it set to send it text for this domain.  Is it not sending in
> plain text?  I have the same settings for other mailing lists as well.

You're sending multipart, plain and html, mails.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Stop tagline theft! Copyright your tagline (c)

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

On Friday 11 January 2008, Dale wrote:

> Qian Qiao wrote:
> > I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client
> > cannot render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people on
> > the list have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post in
> > plain text, at least in this list.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> I have it set to send it text for this domain.  Is it not sending in
> plain text?  I have the same settings for other mailing lists as well.
>
> Thanks for pointing it out if it is not sending plain text tho.

It seems you're sending a multipart/alternative, which means that the 
message contains both the plain text and the html (in separate sections 
of course), and it's up to the MUA of the receiver to choose which to 
display. At least that's what I'm seeing here.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:17:11 +0000, Qian Qiao wrote:


> I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client cannot
> render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people on the list
> have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post in plain text,
> at least in this list.


Ditto, thanks for saying it.


-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

Thufir wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:17:11 +0000, Qian Qiao wrote:
>
>
>   
>> I'm sorry this goes OT Dale, but unfortunately, my mail client cannot
>> render html messages properly, and I trust a lot of people on the list
>> have the same problem. If would be nice if you can post in plain text,
>> at least in this list.
>>     
>
>
> Ditto, thanks for saying it.
>
>
> -Thufir
>
>   

Well actually it was pointed out, I think in another thread on this,
that it was sending it both in plain text and HTML.  That way your email
client could pick n choose which one it wants to show you.  Sort of
leaves it up to you then.  ;-)  I like HTML myself.  :D

It should be set to text only now tho, which is what I thought it was
all the time since I set it that way ages ago.

Your welcome.

Dale

:-)  :-) 
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 11, 2008 11:19 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday 11 January 2008, Galevsky wrote:
> > You can say that devs have no time to make it, but please, don't tell
> > that Gentoo doesn't need any installCD (outdated means no CD at all
> > for many computers nowaday).
>
> Please tell me where I said any such thing.

As I said, outdated means no CD at all for many computers nowaday.
And I tought you told us that the current Gentoo installCD has no need
to be upgraded.

> I'll give you a clue - I didn't. I asked you why you think the install
> CD needs updated.

I misunderstood your question...

> Apparently your answer to that is that you have a ICH9 machine. That's
> fine, it's reasonable to need that supported on the BootCD. Was it
> really necessary to take out your frustrations/whatever with the
> installer on me on a public mailing list? Hmmm?

Sorry if I were rude with you Alan, it was not my intentions, plus I
mixed up you question with the affirmation "no need to update".

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 11 January 2008, Galevsky wrote:
> Sorry if I were rude with you Alan, it was not my intentions, plus I
> mixed up you question with the affirmation "no need to update".

No problem.

Part of the fun of gentoo is you get to figure out how it works and you 
get to hack it yourself.

Kinda like driving an old Ferrari :-) 
I honestly believe that gentoo is not built for the mass market, so 
their needs do not apply. The real needs do apply though.

An installer that always works and is always current is not an 
appropriate high-priority need for gentoo.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Daniel da Veiga]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8, Size: 1667 bytes --]

On Jan 11, 2008 11:40 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday 11 January 2008, Galevsky wrote:
> > Sorry if I were rude with you Alan, it was not my intentions, plus I
> > mixed up you question with the affirmation "no need to update".
>
> No problem.
>
> Part of the fun of gentoo is you get to figure out how it works and you
> get to hack it yourself.
>
> Kinda like driving an old Ferrari :-)
> I honestly believe that gentoo is not built for the mass market, so
> their needs do not apply. The real needs do apply though.
>
> An installer that always works and is always current is not an
> appropriate high-priority need for gentoo.
>

I completely agree with Alan, Gentoo is a metadistro, and it provides
(by Handbook) a LOT of ways to install, spending time on a new CD
every 6 months just to support hardware, while you still need to type
the commands yourself is a waste of time, and the Installer has proven
its not worth the trouble. Its like reinventing the wheel, as we
already have TONS of small, updated LiveCDs all over the web. You just
CAN'T compare a binary distro install with Gentoo, that's like
comparing a Bettle with a Landrover, just because both of them have
explosing engines.

The only thing I like about new releases are the nift livecd gensplash
themes... Lol.

-- 
Daniel da Veiga

Filosofia de TI: Programadores de verdade consideram o conceito "o que
você vê é o que você tem" tão ruim em editores de texto quanto em
mulheres. Não, o programador de verdade quer um editor de texto do
estilo "você pediu, você levou" - complicado, indecifrável, poderoso,
impiedoso, perigoso.
éí¢‹¬z¹b²Û z{h¢Šà™¨¥Šx%ŠË

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:58:15 -0200, Daniel da Veiga wrote:

> I completely agree with Alan, Gentoo is a metadistro, and it provides
> (by Handbook) a LOT of ways to install,

Ok, but I would like to see all those sabayon users taken into the fold.


-Thufir

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

Thufir <hawat.thufir@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:58:15 -0200, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
> 
>> I completely agree with Alan, Gentoo is a metadistro, and it provides
>> (by Handbook) a LOT of ways to install,
> 
> Ok, but I would like to see all those sabayon users taken into the fold.

Uhm, why? Sabayon is a distribution of itself. Sure, it's based on
Gentoo, but it certainly has its own "vision" and thus also its own
userbase. The userbase of Gentoo and Sabayon don't have to be identical.
What works for them, doesn't have to work for "us".

Michael

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:44:12 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:


> Uhm, why? Sabayon is a distribution of itself. Sure, it's based on
> Gentoo, but it certainly has its own "vision" and thus also its own
> userbase. The userbase of Gentoo and Sabayon don't have to be identical.
> What works for them, doesn't have to work for "us".

Only in that I would like to see Gentoo have more users, which attract 
more developers.


-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Norman Rieß]

Galevsky schrieb:
> On Jan 11, 2008 10:38 AM, Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs.ext@nsn.com> wrote:
>   
>> Am Freitag, 11. Januar 2008 schrieb ext Shaochun Wang:
>>
>>     
>>> Currently, Gentoo has not updated
>>> its installation CD for a long time!
>>>       
>> They don't need to. One week ago I used a GRML cd to install a new Gentoo
>> system.
>>     
>
> &
>
> On Jan 11, 2008 10:22 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Why do you think gentoo *needs* to update it's install CD?
>>     
>
> Because Gentoo is a distro, and as a distro, it should have a way to
> be installed on a computer... I upgraded my hardware recently and my
> previous gentoo distro was not able to boot (ICH9 + JMicron
> controller) because no SATA HD was recognized with my old 2.6.18
> kernel.... the only way to boot was livecd with right kernel/modules.
> But Gentoo was not able to provide a *so basic feature*, the one that
> let me boot on my computer.... and you see no needs with that ? Well,
> if Gentoo is not able to make my computer booting, it is sure that I
> have no need to get maintained portage nor any one of the ebuilds...
>
> [..]
>
> Gal'
>   
Right, basicly telling people "You have to depend on / use other distros
to install our OS, cause we are not able to / don´t have time to provide
this" sounds a little fishy. It makes Gentoo look incomplete.

MHO

Norman
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Daniel Pielmeier]

The 2007.1 release has been canceled by the release-engineering-team
because of multiple-problems, maybe there will be a 2008.0 release
with fresh install-media.

Again i recommend join gentoo-dev and you will see what is going on!
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 11, 2008 11:30 AM, Daniel Pielmeier
<daniel.pielmeier@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The 2007.1 release has been canceled by the release-engineering-team
> because of multiple-problems, maybe there will be a 2008.0 release
> with fresh install-media.
>
> Again i recommend join gentoo-dev and you will see what is going on!

Be sure: I am currently working for that and I 'll do all my
possibilities to invest me in Gentoo.

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Is GWN dead?

[Pongracz Istvan]

I'm back :)
Anyway, I create some "install" cds for my own and I put it to my
website for others.
>15 downloads registered. (~8GB transfer for the latest)

I also create a fresh stage3 for my usage (just for fun, etc.) and I
also put it to my site. 3.6GB downloaded (more than 30).

So, it is possible to create your own livecd at any time, just start to
play with catalyst :)

Cheers,
István



2008. 01. 11, péntek keltezéssel 11.50-kor Galevsky ezt írta:
> On Jan 11, 2008 11:30 AM, Daniel Pielmeier
> <daniel.pielmeier@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > The 2007.1 release has been canceled by the release-engineering-team
> > because of multiple-problems, maybe there will be a 2008.0 release
> > with fresh install-media.
> >
> > Again i recommend join gentoo-dev and you will see what is going on!
> 
> Be sure: I am currently working for that and I 'll do all my
> possibilities to invest me in Gentoo.
> 
> Gal'
-- 
eGroupWare, gLiveCD, gentoo és barátai
http://www.osbusiness.hu
„A humor a méltóság támasza, fölényünket hirdeti 
mindazzal szemben, amit a sors ránk mér.” 
(Romain Gary)

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:30:07 +0100, Pongracz Istvan wrote:


> So, it is possible to create your own livecd at any time, just start to
> play with catalyst


Not that I want to beat a dead horse, but this doesn't follow for me.  If 
catalyst is so fantastic at creating live cd's, why isn't it used to 
automagically create a new live cd every week?

It's antithetical to Linux, FOSS and Gentoo to have umpteen users doing 
the same process umpteen times instead of doing it once, centrally.  
FWIW, it's more the lack of some kind of "anaconda" type installer than 
the up-to-dateness of the cd which irks me.


-Thufir

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[James]

Daniel Pielmeier <daniel.pielmeier <at> googlemail.com> writes:


> Again i recommend join gentoo-dev and you will see what is going on!

Excellent idea.

Is there a place where we can conveniently read this list, and not have
posting privileges?

An archive list server or such?


James




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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Kenneth Prugh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 490 bytes --]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:59:52 +0000 (UTC)
James <wireless@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:

> Daniel Pielmeier <daniel.pielmeier <at> googlemail.com> writes:
> 
> 
> > Again i recommend join gentoo-dev and you will see what is going on!
> 
> Excellent idea.
> 
> Is there a place where we can conveniently read this list, and not
> have posting privileges?
> 
> An archive list server or such?
> 
> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> 

http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/

-- 
Ken69267

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· James <wireless@tampabay.rr.com>:

> Daniel Pielmeier <daniel.pielmeier <at> googlemail.com> writes:
> 
> 
>> Again i recommend join gentoo-dev and you will see what is going on!
> 
> Excellent idea.
> 
> Is there a place where we can conveniently read this list, and not have
> posting privileges?
> 
> An archive list server or such?

Gmane. They offer a NNTP/Usenet access at nttp://news.gmane.org
and also a quite good web access at http://gmane.org/.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
E Out of DATA, 0:1


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Samstag, 12. Januar 2008, James wrote:
> Daniel Pielmeier <daniel.pielmeier <at> googlemail.com> writes:
> > Again i recommend join gentoo-dev and you will see what is going on!
>
> Excellent idea.
>
> Is there a place where we can conveniently read this list, and not have
> posting privileges?
>
> An archive list server or such?
>
>
> James

http://marc.info
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:12:34 +0100, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:

>> Is there a place where we can conveniently read this list, and not have
>> posting privileges?
>>
>> An archive list server or such?
>>
>>
>> James
> 
> http://marc.info

I prefer:

http://groups.google.com/group/linux.gentoo.user/topics

However, I do wish that I could post from there.  There's always gmane :)


-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 766 bytes --]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:27:03 +0000 (UTC), Thufir wrote:

> > http://marc.info  
> 
> I prefer:
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/linux.gentoo.user/topics

What's wrong with http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-user/ ?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Scientists decode the first confirmed alien transmission from outer space
...
"This really works! Just send 5*10^50 H atoms to each of the five star
systems listed below. Then, add your own system to the top of the list,
delete the system at the bottom, and send out copies of this message to
100 other solar systems. If you follow these instructions, within 0.25 of
a galactic rotation you are guaranteed to receive enough hydrogen in
return to power your civilization until entropy reaches its maximum!"

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:

> Right, basicly telling people "You have to depend on / use other distros
> to install our OS, cause we are not able to / don´t have time to provide
> this" sounds a little fishy. It makes Gentoo look incomplete.

Well, but providing outdated (ie. non-usable for new systems) install
medium is also very bad. And if the installer doesn't work (satisfactory),
then that gives an even worse impression.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
The louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons.
                -- Ralph Waldo Emerson


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Norman Rieß]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 626 bytes --]

Michael Schmarck schrieb:
> · Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:
>
>   
>> Right, basicly telling people "You have to depend on / use other distros
>> to install our OS, cause we are not able to / don´t have time to provide
>> this" sounds a little fishy. It makes Gentoo look incomplete.
>>     
>
> Well, but providing outdated (ie. non-usable for new systems) install
> medium is also very bad. And if the installer doesn't work (satisfactory),
> then that gives an even worse impression.
>
> Michael Schmarck
>   
I agree.
And i don't think that this is contradicting my statement, does it?

Norman

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1128 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:

> Michael Schmarck schrieb:
>> · Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:
>>
>>   
>>> Right, basicly telling people "You have to depend on / use other distros
>>> to install our OS, cause we are not able to / don´t have time to provide
>>> this" sounds a little fishy. It makes Gentoo look incomplete.
>>>     
>>
>> Well, but providing outdated (ie. non-usable for new systems) install
>> medium is also very bad. And if the installer doesn't work (satisfactory),
>> then that gives an even worse impression.
>>
>> Michael Schmarck
>>   
> I agree.
> And i don't think that this is contradicting my statement, does it?

Depends. You're saying, that Gentoo might look to be incomplete, if
it were to rely on other distributions (Live CDs). I'm saying, that
it currently already looks to be incomplete, despite there being a
install CD - a CD, which is outdated.


Michael Schmarck
-- 
You can't have everything.  Where would you put it?
                -- Steven Wright


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

Michael Schmarck ha scritto:
> · Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:

> Depends. You're saying, that Gentoo might look to be incomplete, if
> it were to rely on other distributions (Live CDs). I'm saying, that
> it currently already looks to be incomplete, despite there being a
> install CD - a CD, which is outdated.

And why something that can be installed and works is incomplete?
Would you call Gentoo incomplete because it doesn't provide physical
hardware where to install it? No. So why do not having an official
livecd makes it incomplete?

Think it the other way. Gentoo is, among other things, a way to install
Linux from any decent Linux live cd. From this point of view, the fact
that Gentoo sometimes releases an 'official' live cd is more of a luxury
than something it needs to be complete.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Pongracz Istvan]

....
> > install CD - a CD, which is outdated.
...
> hardware where to install it? No. So why do not having an official
> livecd makes it incomplete?
> 
> Think it the other way. Gentoo is, among other things, a way to install
> Linux from any decent Linux live cd. From this point of view, the fact
> that Gentoo sometimes releases an 'official' live cd is more of a luxury
> than something it needs to be complete.
> 
> m.

Hi,

As I wrote before, there is a tool, calles catalyst, which is used to
create "official" and up-to-date gentoo livecd.
Everybody have the chance to create their own.

I did it, that means, it is not really hard to learn :)

By the way, I customized my livecd to support the
rsync-to-the-hard-drive and viola', you have a fresh and running
system :)

The official install CD is a good marketing and reference, but in fact,
it is not necessary.

I think, this issue not really critical.
If somebody needs, create his own or change the distro.
Power of freedom :)

Cheers,
István



-- 
eGroupWare, gLiveCD, gentoo és barátai
http://www.osbusiness.hu
„A humor a méltóság támasza, fölényünket hirdeti 
mindazzal szemben, amit a sors ránk mér.” 
(Romain Gary)

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Norman Rieß]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1207 bytes --]

Michael Schmarck schrieb:
> · Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:
>
>   
>> Michael Schmarck schrieb:
>>     
>>> · Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Right, basicly telling people "You have to depend on / use other distros
>>>> to install our OS, cause we are not able to / don´t have time to provide
>>>> this" sounds a little fishy. It makes Gentoo look incomplete.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Well, but providing outdated (ie. non-usable for new systems) install
>>> medium is also very bad. And if the installer doesn't work (satisfactory),
>>> then that gives an even worse impression.
>>>
>>> Michael Schmarck
>>>   
>>>       
>> I agree.
>> And i don't think that this is contradicting my statement, does it?
>>     
>
> Depends. You're saying, that Gentoo might look to be incomplete, if
> it were to rely on other distributions (Live CDs). I'm saying, that
> it currently already looks to be incomplete, despite there being a
> install CD - a CD, which is outdated.
>
>
> Michael Schmarck
>   
Still no complaints about your opinion from my side ;-).
In short. An outdated InstallCD is bad and no InstallCD at all is bad, too.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1910 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:

> Still no complaints about your opinion from my side ;-).

*G*

> In short. An outdated InstallCD is bad and no InstallCD at all is bad, too.

I agree that an outdated Install CD is bad. But I disagree,
that "no Install CD at all is bad". I think it's not bad.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
Computer Science is the only discipline in which we view adding a new wing
to a building as being maintenance
                -- Jim Horning


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Norman Rieß]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 438 bytes --]

Michael Schmarck schrieb:
> · Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:
>
>   
>> Still no complaints about your opinion from my side ;-).
>>     
>
> *G*
>
>   
>> In short. An outdated InstallCD is bad and no InstallCD at all is bad, too.
>>     
>
> I agree that an outdated Install CD is bad. But I disagree,
> that "no Install CD at all is bad". I think it's not bad.
>
> Michael Schmarck
>   
Ok, i'm fine with that.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1020 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Hal Martin]

I installed Gentoo from inside Ubuntu 6.10 (my previous system) through
chroot. This was because I couldn't use a LiveCD as I have an AMD64
based system.

Knoppix and many other LiveCDs are 32bit, as that is currently what a
majority of computers out there are. So, unless you can point me to a
64bit LiveCD that isn't some alternate version of a binary distribution
I believe we still need a Gentoo install CD.

Some people's arguments are that we should rely on other LiveCDs to
build a Gentoo system as this will give the devs more time to work on
things that they feel are more important. I would agree with them
normally, but I'd rather download one CD that contains all the stuff I
need than download a Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora/Mandriva LiveCD (all of those
distributions provide a 64bit LiveCD) and the stage tarball.

Sure, if you're on a 32bit system, any LiveCD will work well for
building a Gentoo system. However, if you happen to be one of the
growing number of people who have purchased a 64bit system (such as an
AMD Athlon, Opteron, or an Intel Pentium D (some models), Pentium Dual
core (E21xx series), Core 2 Duo/Quad, or a Xeon system) and want to run
Gentoo 64bit, your install options are suddenly very limited.

Just my two cents.

-Hal Martin


Michael Schmarck wrote:
> · Norman Rieß <norman@smash-net.org>:
>
>   
>> Right, basicly telling people "You have to depend on / use other distros
>> to install our OS, cause we are not able to / don´t have time to provide
>> this" sounds a little fishy. It makes Gentoo look incomplete.
>>     
>
> Well, but providing outdated (ie. non-usable for new systems) install
> medium is also very bad. And if the installer doesn't work (satisfactory),
> then that gives an even worse impression.
>
> Michael Schmarck
>   

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hal Martin wrote:
> I installed Gentoo from inside Ubuntu 6.10 (my previous system) through
> chroot. This was because I couldn't use a LiveCD as I have an AMD64
> based system.
> 
> Knoppix and many other LiveCDs are 32bit, as that is currently what a
> majority of computers out there are. So, unless you can point me to a
> 64bit LiveCD that isn't some alternate version of a binary distribution
> I believe we still need a Gentoo install CD.

There are in fact quite of few of 64bit LiveCDs. Knoppix64 being one of
them.

A simple Google gives me this:
http://www.frozentech.com/content/livecd.php where you can even filter
LiveCDs.

> 
> Some people's arguments are that we should rely on other LiveCDs to
> build a Gentoo system as this will give the devs more time to work on
> things that they feel are more important. I would agree with them
> normally, but I'd rather download one CD that contains all the stuff I
> need than download a Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora/Mandriva LiveCD (all of those
> distributions provide a 64bit LiveCD) and the stage tarball.

Even with a LiveCD with a stage tarball on it, you will still need to
download additional stuff during the installation, you will still need
to sync the portage tree if you want your system to be up-to-date.

It's almost the same as to downloading a LiveCD and downloading the
tarball separately, so I honestly don't think you can save much work by
having a stage tarball on a LiveCD.

> 
> Sure, if you're on a 32bit system, any LiveCD will work well for
> building a Gentoo system. However, if you happen to be one of the
> growing number of people who have purchased a 64bit system (such as an
> AMD Athlon, Opteron, or an Intel Pentium D (some models), Pentium Dual
> core (E21xx series), Core 2 Duo/Quad, or a Xeon system) and want to run
> Gentoo 64bit, your install options are suddenly very limited.

I myself have 3 machines, a Athlon64X2, a Core2 Duo and a Pentium III,
I've used Gentoo minimal, Knoppix and Knoppix64 CDs during my
installation on these 3 machines and I haven't encounter any problem
using any of them, and that's why I said earlier in the thread that
LiveCDs really doesn't matter, as long as you can boot, fdisk, mount,
chroot, emerge, you are fine :)

I hope I've provided you with some useful information.

- -- Joe


- --
A computer scientist is someone who, when told "go to hell", considers
the "go to" harmful rather than the destination.

GnuPG FP: DE08 57AE A1AD 620C 02AA  CCDD 611B 63AC B146 61D9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHh+89YRtjrLFGYdkRAqubAKC+5mfW9+EYTyd8eKSo5H/G4DVbZQCg3aF9
0aYjVKGwCEKwQJ+hRzO8Ao0=
=Hjvf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

Qian Qiao wrote:
> < SNIP >
>
> I myself have 3 machines, a Athlon64X2, a Core2 Duo and a Pentium III,
> I've used Gentoo minimal, Knoppix and Knoppix64 CDs during my
> installation on these 3 machines and I haven't encounter any problem
> using any of them, and that's why I said earlier in the thread that
> LiveCDs really doesn't matter, as long as you can boot, fdisk, mount,
> chroot, emerge, you are fine :)
>
> I hope I've provided you with some useful information.
>
> -- Joe
>
>

Of course a more recent one is handy when in my situation.  I have
dial-up, a sucky AT&T dial-up at that.  I try to install from the
packages on the CD then upgrade later.  That's the only benefit that I
would see from more recent releases.  Of course, you still end up
downloading it all anyway.  ;-)

I just like the Knoppix thing myself.  It "seems" faster to me. 

Dale

:-)  :-)
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

Galevsky <galevsky@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 11, 2008 10:38 AM, Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs.ext@nsn.com>
> wrote:
>> Am Freitag, 11. Januar 2008 schrieb ext Shaochun Wang:
>>
>> > Currently, Gentoo has not updated
>> > its installation CD for a long time!
>>
>> They don't need to. One week ago I used a GRML cd to install a new Gentoo
>> system.
> 
> &
> 
> On Jan 11, 2008 10:22 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why do you think gentoo *needs* to update it's install CD?
> 
> Because Gentoo is a distro, and as a distro, it should have a way to
> be installed on a computer...

And it has - use a Live CD, like GRML and the like.

> this problem. What Gentoo have to tell to these people ? Let's get to
> hell since Gentoo installCD is outdated ?

And that's the reason the Install CD should be dropped. Obviously (by
the age of the CD), there's a lack of resources. And IMO the scarce
resources would be better spend elsewhere, then in a Live CD/Install
CD.

> You can say that devs have no time to make it, but please, don't tell
> that Gentoo doesn't need any installCD (outdated means no CD at all
> for many computers nowaday).

It needs some way of a Install CD. I don't think, it needs an install
CD of its own.
Michael

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn> wrote:

> Maybe you joke will become the truth. Currently, Gentoo has not updated
> its installation CD for a long time!

Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo. I
also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast. To 
install Gentoo, I'd boot my favorite "rescue system" (GRMl nowadays,
Knoppix back then, but IMO Knoppix is too "fat" for *this* *task*)
and install from there. No need for an install CD.

As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped
without a loss.

Michael

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 11, 2008 11:02 AM, Michael Schmarck
<michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de> wrote:
> Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn> wrote:
>
> Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo. I
> also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast. To
> install Gentoo, I'd boot my favorite "rescue system" (GRMl nowadays,
> Knoppix back then, but IMO Knoppix is too "fat" for *this* *task*)
> and install from there. No need for an install CD.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped
> without a loss.
>
> Michael

I'll try to make you understand it.....

GRML ? Knoppix ? other LiveCD ? What for, man ? Using extra rescue
systems is a liberty, of course, but why should it be a must ? I
always installed my gentoo from the current gentoo installCD since I
see no gain in downloading and burning one more system... when I have
a portage-inside one at disposal ! I don't want to take care about
versions and news about other distros/rescue systems, since I am using
Gentoo which provides me all I need to setup. So, of course, as far as
one of linux distro at least will provide a way to boot up an
up-to-date kernel, all the other distros won't have to maintain their
own releases, but in the end, I am not sure that the whole community
wants to launch the Windows Ubuntu installer, download the required
packages manager from the web and update the system from the good
repository.

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Galevsky <galevsky@gmail.com>:
> On Jan 11, 2008 11:02 AM, Michael Schmarck
> <michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de> wrote:

[...]
>> As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped
>> without a loss.
>>
>> Michael
> 
> I'll try to make you understand it.....

After reading your reply, I've got to say that you failed.

> GRML ? Knoppix ? other LiveCD ? What for, man ?

Oh, quite easy - to install Gentoo. That way, the knowledge of experts
in creating live CDs is leveraged. NIH is not a good point of view, if
you ask me.

> Using extra rescue 
> systems is a liberty, of course, but why should it be a must ? I

Easy - to make use of expert knowledge. To save resources, as that's
obviously a scarcity in Gentoo.

> always installed my gentoo from the current gentoo installCD since I

Fine. I never did that.

> see no gain in downloading and burning one more system...

Uhm? That doesn't make sense. Downloading GRML is no worse than
downloading a Gentoo Live CD.

> [...] I don't want to take care about
> versions 

Me neither, but that's a dream.

> and news about other distros/rescue systems, since I am using 
> Gentoo which provides me all I need to setup. 

Fine for you. That's obviously not the case for Shaochun.

> So, of course, as far as 
> one of linux distro at least will provide a way to boot up an
> up-to-date kernel, all the other distros won't have to maintain their
> own releases, but in the end, I am not sure that the whole community
> wants to launch the Windows Ubuntu installer, download the required
> packages manager from the web and update the system from the good
> repository.

I don't get, what you were trying to say here.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
Real programmers don't draw flowcharts.  Flowcharts are, after all, the
illiterate's form of documentation.  Cavemen drew flowcharts; look how
much good it did them.


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 11, 2008 8:08 PM, Michael Schmarck
<michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de> wrote:
> > GRML ? Knoppix ? other LiveCD ? What for, man ?
>
> Oh, quite easy - to install Gentoo. That way, the knowledge of experts
> in creating live CDs is leveraged. NIH is not a good point of view, if
> you ask me.
>
> > Using extra rescue
> > systems is a liberty, of course, but why should it be a must ? I
>
> Easy - to make use of expert knowledge. To save resources, as that's
> obviously a scarcity in Gentoo.

Not sure that in the whole Gentoo community we cannot find someone not
interested in dev stuff but okay to build CD releases... I can
understand the understaffed argument, but in that case don't tell me
that install CD is bad,  tell me Gentoo has no resource for, but the
debate is "does Gentoo need install CD or not ?".

> > see no gain in downloading and burning one more system...
>
> Uhm? That doesn't make sense. Downloading GRML is no worse than
> downloading a Gentoo Live CD.

Yes it is.  Portage is not included,  you depend on other systems that
don't mind about Gentoo needs and could go on different way, and I
find very strange to have a 2.6.23 stable in Gentoo, but not necessary
on other liveCD at the same time, plus networkless installations... I
think it is very good -for any distro-  to have an installCD that
brings a good system to not-connected machines. Just for them.

> > [...] I don't want to take care about
> > versions
>
> Me neither, but that's a dream.

I mean dealing with Gentoo components versions sounds sensible....
watching GRML/Knoppix/whatever website for a Gentoo install...surely
less.

> > So, of course, as far as
> > one of linux distro at least will provide a way to boot up an
> > up-to-date kernel, all the other distros won't have to maintain their
> > own releases, but in the end, I am not sure that the whole community
> > wants to launch the Windows Ubuntu installer, download the required
> > packages manager from the web and update the system from the good
> > repository.
>
> I don't get, what you were trying to say here.

I mean that one particular aspect of linux world that I love is
choice. I am very pleased to show different live CD to newbies and I
hope that all other distros won't have the same reasoning. Okay, GRML
does a nice job. But if a Gentoo user wants to spend time to build
liveCD, I see no reason not to let him release official iso ... and
propose a Gentoo alternative. Certainly not because guys are experts
in rescue systems at grml.org.

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Galevsky wrote:
> Yes it is.  Portage is not included

Huh? If are talking about installation, then whether the LiveCD carries
portage or not is irrelavent, portage is in the stage tarball you fetch
over the internet.

> you depend on other systems that
> don't mind about Gentoo needs and could go on different way, and I
> find very strange to have a 2.6.23 stable in Gentoo, but not necessary
> on other liveCD at the same time.

You don't depend on the LiveCD, it merely boots your computer and gives
you fdisk and mount, as soon as you unpack the stage tarball and chroot
into it, you are using the binaries from the stage tarball and gentoo's
base-layout, and at that point, what the LiveCD is becomes completely
irrelavent, so I'm afraid I can't agree with you here.

> plus networkless installations... I
> think it is very good -for any distro-  to have an installCD that
> brings a good system to not-connected machines. Just for them.

Networkless installations is well documented. Even without gentoo's
LiveCD, it can easily be done, some LiveCDs allow you to switch disc, or
 you can just use portable medias like USB flash. If you Google for it,
there are plenty of guides and tutorials, so I won't go into details.

> I mean dealing with Gentoo components versions sounds sensible....
> watching GRML/Knoppix/whatever website for a Gentoo install...surely
> less.

As I said in the thread earlier, do not bind your mind to the idea that
"you need gentoo to install gentoo", the fact is, you don't. The
installation steps from knoppixCD/GRML is almost identical to those from
a Gentoo CD, with only one exception: they don't come with /mnt/gentoo,
so you'll have to mkdir /mnt/gentoo, but if that makes it less sensible
as you claimed, I'm afraid I can't agree.

- -- Joe


- --
A computer scientist is someone who, when told "go to hell", considers
the "go to" harmful rather than the destination.

GnuPG FP: DE08 57AE A1AD 620C 02AA  CCDD 611B 63AC B146 61D9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHh/MbYRtjrLFGYdkRAke5AKCyoN34Yv3WyupfkcdavNiFxx495wCfcR1y
ghjiHu1RP65yHB/DQLIX0Hw=
=LHBM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Saturday 12 January 2008, Qian Qiao wrote:
> > I mean dealing with Gentoo components versions sounds sensible....
> > watching GRML/Knoppix/whatever website for a Gentoo
> > install...surely less.
>
> As I said in the thread earlier, do not bind your mind to the idea
> that "you need gentoo to install gentoo", the fact is, you don't. The
> installation steps from knoppixCD/GRML is almost identical to those
> from a Gentoo CD, with only one exception: they don't come with
> /mnt/gentoo, so you'll have to mkdir /mnt/gentoo, but if that makes
> it less sensible as you claimed, I'm afraid I can't agree.

Without trying to be a complete dick here, I think Gavelsky has not yet 
100% comprehended the essential difference between Gentoo and binary 
distros:

Gentoo is NOT "plug in and go", it is a complex scheme that allows you 
to build other distros. It is not suitable for newbies (disregard the 
occasional newbie that does get it right, that's a minority and very 
atypical), and one really does have to have moved beyond the "Oh, look! 
Shiny installer!" mentality to appreciate it. When you get to that 
stage, you appreciate that you need a bootstrap system to build the 
first stages of your own distro, and you can get that bootstrap system 
from any place you feel like getting it from.

Anybody that feels they *need* or *must have* an official Gentoo 
installer is probably the wrong target market and should be referred to 
other distros that will suit their needs better. This is not a troll or 
an elitist statement, it's just recognizing what gentoo is and what it 
isn't - it's not a distro suitable for someone to whom chroot isn't yet 
second nature.

I could give a traditional car analogy with kit cars, but I think I'm 
into dead horse territory already

alan



-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

Alan McKinnon ha scritto:

> Gentoo is NOT "plug in and go", it is a complex scheme that allows you 
> to build other distros. 

Exactly.
Moreover, I'd go on to say that the fact Gentoo is installable from
almost every reasonable Linux-based live cd is a defining Gentoo
feature. The real Gentoo installer is the combination of the tarball
(the data) and the manual (the algorithms).

The fact that an "official" Gentoo live cd exists is just a happy gift
from developers, and a way to guarantee that there is a reference
environment from which Gentoo can be installed.

While nearly every other distro requires its own live cd installer,
Gentoo (or any Gentoo-like system) requires just a working live cd and a
stage tarball. From there, you go. It's *you* that decide *your*
installation environment, depending on *your* needs. I used Knoppix
once, and Kubuntu another; I think I've never used the "official" Gentoo CD.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Daniel da Veiga]

On Jan 11, 2008 11:29 PM, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan McKinnon ha scritto:
>
> > Gentoo is NOT "plug in and go", it is a complex scheme that allows you
> > to build other distros.
>
> Exactly.
> Moreover, I'd go on to say that the fact Gentoo is installable from
> almost every reasonable Linux-based live cd is a defining Gentoo
> feature. The real Gentoo installer is the combination of the tarball
> (the data) and the manual (the algorithms).
>
> The fact that an "official" Gentoo live cd exists is just a happy gift
> from developers, and a way to guarantee that there is a reference
> environment from which Gentoo can be installed.
>
> While nearly every other distro requires its own live cd installer,
> Gentoo (or any Gentoo-like system) requires just a working live cd and a
> stage tarball. From there, you go. It's *you* that decide *your*
> installation environment, depending on *your* needs. I used Knoppix
> once, and Kubuntu another; I think I've never used the "official" Gentoo CD.
>

True. I may be going OT here, but I think that another feature is that
when you realise you can install Gentoo from any working environment
with basic support, you expect people to think "out of the box".
Sincerely, that's something the world is desperatly in need. Linux by
itself is "Darwinist" [1]. People need to get more knowledge to make
it suits their needs or enhance performance. My whole experience with
Gentoo, command line and deep system configuration makes it a breeze
to deal with any distro out there. That's what make this community one
(if not THE) best knowledge base I've ever seen.

[1] http://www.meiobit.com/a_principal_vantagem_do_linux_e_ser_darwinista
[in portuguese]

-- 
Daniel da Veiga

Filosofia de TI: Programadores de verdade consideram o conceito "o que
você vê é o que você tem" tão ruim em editores de texto quanto em
mulheres. Não, o programador de verdade quer um editor de texto do
estilo "você pediu, você levou" - complicado, indecifrável, poderoso,
impiedoso, perigoso.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 483 bytes --]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 03:29:34 +0100, b.n. wrote:

> Moreover, I'd go on to say that the fact Gentoo is installable from
> almost every reasonable Linux-based live cd is a defining Gentoo
> feature.

It doesn't even need a live CD. I installed Ubuntu when I first got this
laptop, because I needed a Linux environment quickly and I had an Ubuntu
disc. I then installed Gentoo from within the installed Ubuntu OS.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 22: Childproof

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Eric Martin]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> to build other distros. It is not suitable for newbies (disregard the 
> occasional newbie that does get it right, that's a minority and very 
> atypical), and one really does have to have moved beyond the "Oh, look! 
> Shiny installer!" mentality to appreciate it. When you get to that 
> stage, you appreciate that you need a bootstrap system to build the 
> first stages of your own distro, and you can get that bootstrap system 
> from any place you feel like getting it from.
>   
I came to Gentoo at gentoo 1.2 / gentoo 1.4 (I don't remember the year 
but it was around 2002).  I was a GNU/Linux newbie who only knew RedHat 
and didn't quite understand compiling kernels.  Doing the install taught 
me GNU/Linux and I'm better for it.  I think newbies should try it, but 
unfortunately a lot might be turned off because it's 'too much work'.
> Anybody that feels they *need* or *must have* an official Gentoo 
> installer is probably the wrong target market and should be referred to 
> other distros that will suit their needs better. This is not a troll or 
> an elitist statement, it's just recognizing what gentoo is and what it 
> isn't - it's not a distro suitable for someone to whom chroot isn't yet 
> second nature.
>   
I don't think it's an elitist statement, I agree in thinking that we 
shouldn't cater to the lcd.  There are plenty of distros out there that 
work just fine and the greatest thing about FOSS is choice.  If all of 
the options are the same there's no point.  Again though, I have to 
disagree with the point that it's not for somebody whom chroot isn't yet 
second nature: I learned chroot through the install.  I've tried playing 
around with Fedora / Ubunttu but I keep going back to Gentoo; it's my 
favorite distro.

just my $0.02
eric
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] gentoo>=sabayon+genkernel

[Δημήτριος Ροπόκης]

Hi guys, I managed to compile, emerge and do anything with sabayon 3.4f.
Now I have a gentoo home made kernel
with:


# emerge --sync
# layman -s sabayon
# emerge genkernel
# kernel-sources      #what ever u want
# eselect kernel list #note which number you want to install
# eselect kernel set x #this will set symlink
# zcat /proc/config.gz > /usr/src/config

# genkernel --kernel-config=/usr/src/config --menuconfig --bootloader=grub  
--splash=sabayon all

reboot

# module-list #to remove or add modules
# # emerge "some_drive"
# module-rebuild rebuild

and finished!
It is really fast and works! I am very Happy!!
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Eric Martin wrote:
> > Anybody that feels they *need* or *must have* an official Gentoo
> > installer is probably the wrong target market and should be
> > referred to other distros that will suit their needs better. This
> > is not a troll or an elitist statement, it's just recognizing what
> > gentoo is and what it isn't - it's not a distro suitable for
> > someone to whom chroot isn't yet second nature.
> >  
>
> I don't think it's an elitist statement, I agree in thinking that we
> shouldn't cater to the lcd.  There are plenty of distros out there
> that work just fine and the greatest thing about FOSS is choice.  If
> all of the options are the same there's no point.  Again though, I
> have to disagree with the point that it's not for somebody whom
> chroot isn't yet second nature: I learned chroot through the install.
>  I've tried playing around with Fedora / Ubunttu but I keep going
> back to Gentoo; it's my favorite distro.

I know my statement about chroot looks like it should be taken 
literally, but it wasn't meant that way. Read it more as illustrative, 
that the potential user should be reasonably familiar with the more 
unusual commands in *nix systems - chroot, grep, the idea of pipes and 
redirection and many many more. After all if they are going to be using 
these tools, they should know something about them.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Mark Knecht]

On Jan 15, 2008 12:48 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Eric Martin wrote:
> > > Anybody that feels they *need* or *must have* an official Gentoo
> > > installer is probably the wrong target market and should be
> > > referred to other distros that will suit their needs better. This
> > > is not a troll or an elitist statement, it's just recognizing what
> > > gentoo is and what it isn't - it's not a distro suitable for
> > > someone to whom chroot isn't yet second nature.
> > >
> >
> > I don't think it's an elitist statement, I agree in thinking that we
> > shouldn't cater to the lcd. There are plenty of distros out there
> > that work just fine and the greatest thing about FOSS is choice. If
> > all of the options are the same there's no point. Again though, I
> > have to disagree with the point that it's not for somebody whom
> > chroot isn't yet second nature: I learned chroot through the install.
> > I've tried playing around with Fedora / Ubunttu but I keep going
> > back to Gentoo; it's my favorite distro.
>
> I know my statement about chroot looks like it should be taken
> literally, but it wasn't meant that way. Read it more as illustrative,
> that the potential user should be reasonably familiar with the more
> unusual commands in *nix systems - chroot, grep, the idea of pipes and
> redirection and many many more. After all if they are going to be using
> these tools, they should know something about them.
>

Or the user could be like me - no experience with any of these
commands but a moderate interest in learning. I hope this users list
will continue to be supportive of folks like me. I was pointed to
Gentoo 7 years ago by a very experienced Linux sys admin at a start up
I was working at in Silicon Valley. Primarily through the help of
this list I managed to get my first machine working in a few days and
today have probably built 20 Gentoo machines. My longest lived, used
my my dad who will be 80 this year, has now been running over 5 years.
I couldn't have done it without the folks on this list.

Grant you, I get that I'm not the target market, but I am someone who
has benefited greatly from Gentoo and the generosity of the folks on
this list. I hope it will continue for others that follow over the
years to come.

Thanks,
Mark
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Galevsky <galevsky@gmail.com>:

> On Jan 11, 2008 8:08 PM, Michael Schmarck
> <michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de> wrote:
>> > GRML ? Knoppix ? other LiveCD ? What for, man ?
>>
>> Oh, quite easy - to install Gentoo. That way, the knowledge of experts
>> in creating live CDs is leveraged. NIH is not a good point of view, if
>> you ask me.
>>
>> > Using extra rescue
>> > systems is a liberty, of course, but why should it be a must ? I
>>
>> Easy - to make use of expert knowledge. To save resources, as that's
>> obviously a scarcity in Gentoo.
> 
> Not sure that in the whole Gentoo community we cannot find someone not
> interested in dev stuff but okay to build CD releases...

Well, it seems that such a person could not be found, if you
take into consideration that the Install CD is somewhat old
by now.

> I can 
> understand the understaffed argument, but in that case don't tell me
> that install CD is bad,  tell me Gentoo has no resource for, but the
> debate is "does Gentoo need install CD or not ?".

Well, I do think, that a "suboptimal" install CD is indeed bad.
A non-existant install CD would be better, as far as I'm concerned.

>> > see no gain in downloading and burning one more system...
>>
>> Uhm? That doesn't make sense. Downloading GRML is no worse than
>> downloading a Gentoo Live CD.
> 
> Yes it is.  Portage is not included,  

So? The portage tree isn't that big. Only 140m, or so.

> you depend on other systems that 
> don't mind about Gentoo needs 

They don't need to. They just "have to" provide a way to boot a system
and offer a way to chroot.


Michael Schmarck
-- 
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day.  Teach a man to fish,
and he'll invite himself over for dinner.
                -- Calvin Keegan


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

[gentoo-user] Gentoo Install CD : was Is GWN dead?

[Philip Webb]

080111 Michael Schmarck wrote:
> Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn> wrote:
>> Currently, Gentoo has not updated its installation CD for a long time!
> Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo.
> I also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast.
> To install Gentoo, I'd boot my favorite "rescue system" (GRMl nowadays,
> Knoppix back then, but IMO Knoppix is too "fat" for *this* *task*)
> and install from there.  As far as I'm concerned,
> the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped without a loss.

I had to use it to set up my 64-bit system 0710xx :
Knoppix didn't have a 64-bit kernel
& SystemRescue couldn't connect to my ADSL Internet line.
I installed by hand following the steps in the manual with a few tweaks
for my own personal needs.  I didn't like the Gnome desktop on the CD
& wondered why it doesn't use eg Fluxbox, but that's personal taste (smile).

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow@chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Install CD : was Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 439 bytes --]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 06:41:09 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:

> I didn't like the Gnome desktop on the CD
> & wondered why it doesn't use eg Fluxbox, but that's personal taste
> (smile).

I understand they are switching to a lighter desktop for the next
release, because GNOME was using too much of the CD that was needed for
packages.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

8088 = model T Ford. Pentium = supercharged 400 horsepower model T Ford.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo Install CD : was Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:35:38 +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:


> I understand they are switching to a lighter desktop for the next
> release, because GNOME was using too much of the CD that was needed for
> packages.
>

The only packages (beyond a desktop) required are (my opinion):


xchat or pidgin
firefox



-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[David Relson]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:02:08 +0100
Michael Schmarck wrote:

> Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn> wrote:
> 
> > Maybe you joke will become the truth. Currently, Gentoo has not
> > updated its installation CD for a long time!
> 
> Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo. I
> also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast. To 
> install Gentoo, I'd boot my favorite "rescue system" (GRMl nowadays,
> Knoppix back then, but IMO Knoppix is too "fat" for *this* *task*)
> and install from there. No need for an install CD.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped
> without a loss.
> 
> Michael

I used the Gentoo LiveCD when I started with Gentoo in 2006.  Prior
Linux experience covered 8 or so years with Slackware, RedHat, and
Mandrake.

The installation was not smooth.  My recollection is that the GUI
installer asked for the same information multiple times and there were
problems installing packages from the CD's.  I ended up with a partial
install that needed manual fixing.  The process was painful, not
smooth, but I was able to get Gentoo up and running.

When I upgraded from 32-bits to 64-bits, I started with the minimal CD
and did a manual upgrade.  The process worked well though it was time
consuming (since I used my old world file to ensure I had 64 bit
versions of everything). 

By contrast, I've done multiple Mandrake/Mandriva installs, most
recently about 6 months ago (on an old laptop).  The Mandriva install
was dead simple and it was up and running within an hour.

IMHO, for new users to Gentoo having an easy to use installer and a
current LiveCD (no more than 6 months old) is very important.

Regards,

David
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Eddie Mihalow Jr]

David Relson wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:02:08 +0100
> Michael Schmarck wrote:
> 
>> Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe you joke will become the truth. Currently, Gentoo has not
>>> updated its installation CD for a long time!
>> Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo. I
>> also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast. To 
>> install Gentoo, I'd boot my favorite "rescue system" (GRMl nowadays,
>> Knoppix back then, but IMO Knoppix is too "fat" for *this* *task*)
>> and install from there. No need for an install CD.
>>
>> As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped
>> without a loss.
>>
>> Michael
> 
> I used the Gentoo LiveCD when I started with Gentoo in 2006.  Prior
> Linux experience covered 8 or so years with Slackware, RedHat, and
> Mandrake.
> 
> The installation was not smooth.  My recollection is that the GUI
> installer asked for the same information multiple times and there were
> problems installing packages from the CD's.  I ended up with a partial
> install that needed manual fixing.  The process was painful, not
> smooth, but I was able to get Gentoo up and running.
> 
> When I upgraded from 32-bits to 64-bits, I started with the minimal CD a binary distr
> and did a manual upgrade.  The process worked well though it was time
> consuming (since I used my old world file to ensure I had 64 bit
> versions of everything). 
> 
> By contrast, I've done multiple Mandrake/Mandriva installs, most
> recently about 6 months ago (on an old laptop).  The Mandriva install
> was dead simple and it was up and running within an hour.
> 
> IMHO, for new users to Gentoo having an easy to use installer and a
> current LiveCD (no more than 6 months old) is very important.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> David
You are missing the point of Gentoo then. We are NOT a binary distro (to 
repeat ad nauseum). If you want that kind of install, please change 
distros. I do find these other methods of install to be interesting though.
Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot image to install?

-- 
Edward A Mihalow Jr
Mudbug Computers and Networks
Gentoo! Linux
Registered Linux User#225662
New Orleans,LA
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 11, 2008 2:25 PM, Eddie Mihalow Jr <eamjr56@bellsouth.net> wrote
> You are missing the point of Gentoo then. We are NOT a binary distro (to
> repeat ad nauseum). If you want that kind of install, please change
> distros. I do find these other methods of install to be interesting though.
> Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot image to install?
>

With just sources, you can't do anything. Even when you built your LFS
you have to download first you toolchain as binaries, before
re-compilation. To compile a compiler..... you need a compiler. Good.
But what is the problem ? No issue here. You just know that without a
working PC and toolchain binaries, there is nothing to do.

Should we consider that LFS is not a true custom-made system and loads
the dice ? Of course not, since in the end, you get the expected
result.

Same thing here. You are telling me that my not-bootable linux system
-possibly out of any network- won't face any issue since there is a
repository containing Gentoo sources somewhere and that PXE are not
for dogs. Okay... tel me how to install Gentoo in that case. On the
contrary, I think installCD is a response to an existing need, and it
worth bringing solutions to existing needs.

Gentoo is not for me since I can't boot on PXE ? I don't want to give
one cent to each Gentoo user that can't boot on PXE but needs an
installCD/liveCD first.

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII, Size: 2387 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:09:04 +0100
Galevsky <galevsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> With just sources, you can't do anything. Even when you built your LFS
> you have to download first you toolchain as binaries, before
> re-compilation. To compile a compiler..... you need a compiler. Good.
> But what is the problem ? No issue here. You just know that without a
> working PC and toolchain binaries, there is nothing to do.
> 
> Should we consider that LFS is not a true custom-made system and loads
> the dice ? Of course not, since in the end, you get the expected
> result.
> 
> Same thing here. You are telling me that my not-bootable linux system
> -possibly out of any network- won't face any issue since there is a
> repository containing Gentoo sources somewhere and that PXE are not
> for dogs. Okay... tel me how to install Gentoo in that case. On the
> contrary, I think installCD is a response to an existing need, and it
> worth bringing solutions to existing needs.
> 
> Gentoo is not for me since I can't boot on PXE ? I don't want to give
> one cent to each Gentoo user that can't boot on PXE but needs an
> installCD/liveCD first.


What is the problem installing Gentoo from a different liveCD, e.g. Knoppix,
then?

As I've said in a earlier email, they are good at making live CDs, take
advantage of it, Gentoo's repository is good and suits the need of people who
want choices and customisation, take advantage of that too.

What extra do you archieve if you install your Gentoo from a Gentoo LiveCD
instead of a Knoppix CD? None!

Stop binding you mind to the concept that "I have to install a Gentoo from a
Gentoo CD", it's not true, start looking at a broader perspective.

Installing Gentoo from other LiveCDs/distros is just as easy as installing from
a Gentoo LiveCD: fdisk, mount, chroot, and emerge. All of these steps are well
documented too.

- -- Joe


- -- 
A computer scientist is someone who, when told "go to hell", considers 
the "go to" harmful rather than the destination.

GnuPG FP: DE08 57AE A1AD 620C 02AA  CCDD 611B 63AC B146 61D9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHh35BYRtjrLFGYdkRArIgAKCgRwX2RBpFp3gKGBR1yIFwJhU7ewCg7RXw
+5b8ic7gLnJyx2qwnlV4jsA=
=1UvI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
éí¢‹¬z¹b²Û z{h¢Šà™¨¥Šx%ŠË

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:33:32 +0000, Qian Qiao wrote:


> What extra do you archieve if you install your Gentoo from a Gentoo
> LiveCD instead of a Knoppix CD? None!
> 
> Stop binding you mind to the concept that "I have to install a Gentoo
> from a Gentoo CD", it's not true, start looking at a broader
> perspective.

I don't think anyone's making that argument.  What I'm asking, at least, 
is why Gentoo prides itself on having one of the steepest learning curves.

Let's turn this around: if Gentoo were to attract a larger user base I 
posit that this would attract more developers.



-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Thursday 17 January 2008, Thufir wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:33:32 +0000, Qian Qiao wrote:
> > What extra do you archieve if you install your Gentoo from a Gentoo
> > LiveCD instead of a Knoppix CD? None!
> >
> > Stop binding you mind to the concept that "I have to install a
> > Gentoo from a Gentoo CD", it's not true, start looking at a broader
> > perspective.
>
> I don't think anyone's making that argument.  What I'm asking, at
> least, is why Gentoo prides itself on having one of the steepest
> learning curves.

Because it's a source-based distro.

And that one simple fact changes EVERYTHING.

Now think this through - you have a source based distro where everything 
is built locally. What does it take to boot strap such a system 
install? What do you need to provide? What tools must be available? How 
will they be made available? Then the killer question:

What does the user need to know to be able to do this?

Doesn't matter how you spin it, we don't have a binary distro and what 
works there probably doesn't work here. We have to use techniques that 
actually work here, and catering for every possible user type, a la 
Mandriva, is simply not going to work.

If a gentoo LiveCD is such a good idea, it would have been done 
successfully and correctly. It was tried, it didn't work out. Now 
analyze why it didn't work out and be willing to accept while doing 
this that perhaps your own wishes are not viable.

> Let's turn this around: if Gentoo were to attract a larger user base
> I posit that this would attract more developers.

Who says Gentoo does not already have a large user base consisting of 
exactly the kind of users that are ideal for Gentoo? It has not been 
established that this is not the case.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Thursday 17 January 2008, Thufir wrote:
>   
>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:33:32 +0000, Qian Qiao wrote:
>>     
>>> What extra do you archieve if you install your Gentoo from a Gentoo
>>> LiveCD instead of a Knoppix CD? None!
>>>
>>> Stop binding you mind to the concept that "I have to install a
>>> Gentoo from a Gentoo CD", it's not true, start looking at a broader
>>> perspective.
>>>       
>> I don't think anyone's making that argument.  What I'm asking, at
>> least, is why Gentoo prides itself on having one of the steepest
>> learning curves.
>>     
>
> Because it's a source-based distro.
>
> And that one simple fact changes EVERYTHING.
>
> Now think this through - you have a source based distro where everything 
> is built locally. What does it take to boot strap such a system 
> install? What do you need to provide? What tools must be available? How 
> will they be made available? Then the killer question:
>
> What does the user need to know to be able to do this?
>
> Doesn't matter how you spin it, we don't have a binary distro and what 
> works there probably doesn't work here. We have to use techniques that 
> actually work here, and catering for every possible user type, a la 
> Mandriva, is simply not going to work.
>   

Well said.  Gentoo is nothing like Mandriva, Mandrake or whatever it is
called now.  I switched from Mandrake and while Gentoo does have a
learning curve, my only other option to have the control I wanted was
Linux from Scratch.  That was a bit much for me, no tarball to at least
start out with.

I still like having the CD around tho.  ;-)

Dale

:-)
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:10:01 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:


>> Let's turn this around: if Gentoo were to attract a larger user base I
>> posit that this would attract more developers.
> 
> Who says Gentoo does not already have a large user base consisting of
> exactly the kind of users that are ideal for Gentoo? It has not been
> established that this is not the case.


Absolutely, the community support within Gentoo speaks to the distro 
having, in my opinion, the best community.

I'd like to see the quantity of Gentoo users increase partly because I 
think it's so fantastic.


-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 429 bytes --]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:19:48 +0000 (UTC), Thufir wrote:

> Let's turn this around: if Gentoo were to attract a larger user base I 
> posit that this would attract more developers.

How do you draw that conclusion? How would attracting users who are
unwilling to read documentation and get their hands dirty increase the
number of potential developers?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

COMMAND: A suggestion made to a computer.

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:00:51 +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:

>> Let's turn this around: if Gentoo were to attract a larger user base I
>> posit that this would attract more developers.
> 
> How do you draw that conclusion? How would attracting users who are
> unwilling to read documentation and get their hands dirty increase the
> number of potential developers?


Taken to the extreme, if *all* the ubuntu users (to pick on ubuntu for a 
minute) suddenly switched to gentoo I would expect the ubuntu developers 
to follow.


-Thufir

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

[gentoo-user] q: how to make gentoo site sync for greek users

[Δημήτριος Ροπόκης]

  plan to make a site sync to gentoo, but with easy download greek  
translations,
my "problem" is I want to make it like gentoo.org,
Greek users do not participate easy in open source,
I am not programmer, but I can make linux work in most pc's,
so now I am looking for a way to make an Greek Gentoo installer,
I think if I manage the site in next 2 months, I can start sync portage by  
March,
and in summer I maybe have done the basic job,
by then I hope people to help,
of course all this I want to be add to gentoo,
not a fork, or another one distro around,
my problem is the how to start,
any opinions pls welcome.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] q: how to make gentoo site sync for greek users

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1357 bytes --]

On Friday 18 January 2008, Δημήτριος Ροπόκης wrote:
>   plan to make a site sync to gentoo, but with easy download greek
> translations,
> my "problem" is I want to make it like gentoo.org,
> Greek users do not participate easy in open source,
> I am not programmer, but I can make linux work in most pc's,
> so now I am looking for a way to make an Greek Gentoo installer,
> I think if I manage the site in next 2 months, I can start sync portage by
> March,
> and in summer I maybe have done the basic job,
> by then I hope people to help,
> of course all this I want to be add to gentoo,
> not a fork, or another one distro around,
> my problem is the how to start,
> any opinions pls welcome.

I am not sure what you mean by a Greek Gentoo installer.  Do you mean you want 
to translate the installation handbook?  Do you mean you want to add Greek 
language to the GUI installer?  Anyway, there is/was a Greek language mailing 
list for translations of the Gentoo documentation and GWN into Greek.  
Perhaps you want to subscribe to it and ask relevant questions there? To do 
so send an empty message to gentoo-doc-el-subscribe@gentoo.org.  Someone may 
have already done what you are after.

If you want to chat online go to irc.freenode.org in the channel #gentoo-el

Hope this helps.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 18 January 2008, Thufir wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:00:51 +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >> Let's turn this around: if Gentoo were to attract a larger user
> >> base I posit that this would attract more developers.
> >
> > How do you draw that conclusion? How would attracting users who are
> > unwilling to read documentation and get their hands dirty increase
> > the number of potential developers?
>
> Taken to the extreme, if *all* the ubuntu users (to pick on ubuntu
> for a minute) suddenly switched to gentoo I would expect the ubuntu
> developers to follow.

Nope. The Ubuntu developers would probably just carry on doing what they 
doing now - developing on Ubuntu. What makes you think they'd change?

I'm getting the feeling that you think the whole world works the way you 
work and have yet to realize that other people are different from you. 
And that groups have different priorities to what you have.

alan

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:04:46 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:


> Nope. The Ubuntu developers would probably just carry on doing what they
> doing now - developing on Ubuntu. What makes you think they'd change?

They would continue to develop it even if *no-one*, outside of the 
developers, used it?  We'll have to agree to disagree on that, even if 
it's a bit of hyperbole.


-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Lowe Schmidt]

The scenario is a bit bizarre I'd say.

On Jan 18, 2008, at 7:46 PM, Thufir wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:04:46 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>
>> Nope. The Ubuntu developers would probably just carry on doing  
>> what they
>> doing now - developing on Ubuntu. What makes you think they'd change?
>
> They would continue to develop it even if *no-one*, outside of the
> developers, used it?  We'll have to agree to disagree on that, even if
> it's a bit of hyperbole.
>
>
> -Thufir
>
> -- 
> gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:06:45 +0100, Lowe Schmidt wrote:

> The scenario is a bit bizarre I'd say.

It's hyperbole, definitely, but meant to illustrate that more users is 
good.  Oh well.

> On Jan 18, 2008, at 7:46 PM, Thufir wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:04:46 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Nope. The Ubuntu developers would probably just carry on doing what
>>> they
>>> doing now - developing on Ubuntu. What makes you think they'd change?
>>
>> They would continue to develop it even if *no-one*, outside of the
>> developers, used it?  We'll have to agree to disagree on that, even if
>> it's a bit of hyperbole.


-Thufir

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

Galevsky <galevsky@gmail.com> wrote:

> tel me how to install Gentoo in that case.

Boot from any Live CD (like GRML) and do the installation from there,
in a chroot.

Michael

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Daniel da Veiga]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8, Size: 932 bytes --]

On Jan 11, 2008 12:53 PM, Michael Schmarck
<michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de> wrote:
> Galevsky <galevsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > tel me how to install Gentoo in that case.
>
> Boot from any Live CD (like GRML) and do the installation from there,
> in a chroot.
>

And you can use any storage media to hold the important contents of
the CD (portage tree and stage tarball), like a USB stick, or another
CD drive. I believe you can even exchange CDs to use the old install
CD while booting from another (I can't remember right now, but I'm
pretty sure Ive done that in the past).

-- 
Daniel da Veiga

Filosofia de TI: Programadores de verdade consideram o conceito "o que
você vê é o que você tem" tão ruim em editores de texto quanto em
mulheres. Não, o programador de verdade quer um editor de texto do
estilo "você pediu, você levou" - complicado, indecifrável, poderoso,
impiedoso, perigoso.
éí¢‹¬z¹b²Û z{h¢Šà™¨¥Šx%ŠË

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Daniel da Veiga <danieldaveiga@gmail.com>:

> CD drive. I believe you can even exchange CDs to use the old install
> CD while booting from another

Depends...

With GRML and Knoppix, there's a "toram" (or something like that) 
kernel parameter, which copies the CD (in compressed form) to RAM.
Only then, you can remove the CD. But this means, that you need to
have at least 1 GB of RAM (800 megs for CD and something to be able
to work). IMO that 1 GB of RAM would be better spend somewhere else
during compilation time.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
"There is no statute of limitations on stupidity."
-- Randomly produced by a computer program called Markov3.


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Eddie Mihalow Jr]

Galevsky wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2008 2:25 PM, Eddie Mihalow Jr <eamjr56@bellsouth.net> wrote
>> You are missing the point of Gentoo then. We are NOT a binary distro (to
>> repeat ad nauseum). If you want that kind of install, please change
>> distros. I do find these other methods of install to be interesting though.
>> Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot image to install?
>>
> 
> With just sources, you can't do anything. Even when you built your LFS
> you have to download first you toolchain as binaries, before
> re-compilation. To compile a compiler..... you need a compiler. Good.
> But what is the problem ? No issue here. You just know that without a
> working PC and toolchain binaries, there is nothing to do.
> 
> Should we consider that LFS is not a true custom-made system and loads
> the dice ? Of course not, since in the end, you get the expected
> result.
> 
> Same thing here. You are telling me that my not-bootable linux system
> -possibly out of any network- won't face any issue since there is a
> repository containing Gentoo sources somewhere and that PXE are not
> for dogs. Okay... tel me how to install Gentoo in that case. On the
> contrary, I think installCD is a response to an existing need, and it
> worth bringing solutions to existing needs.
> 
> Gentoo is not for me since I can't boot on PXE ? I don't want to give
> one cent to each Gentoo user that can't boot on PXE but needs an
> installCD/liveCD first.
> 
> Gal'
I think you are talking to the wrong person in your reply. I was talking 
to the fellow who used the live install cd
and was comparing it to Mandrake/Mandriva, so your answer is off point.
Also if you use Acronis and a image server you can have an image from a 
pre-built machine.
I was asking more the sys admins in the group about how they deloyed 
onto new machines.
Please take your panties out of that knot.

-- 
Edward A Mihalow Jr
Gentoo! Linux
Mudbug Computers and Networks
Registered Linux User#225662
New Orleans,LA
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[YoYo Siska]

Eddie Mihalow Jr wrote:
> Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot image to install?
> 

well, not exactly a PXE boot image... i had to install gentoo on
thinkpad X41T (no cd) some time ago, and I wasn't able to boot from usb
directly ( don't really remember why ;) so i dumped the minimal cd on my
usb stick, copied the kernel and initrd to other machine and booted it
through PXE, the kernel/initrd found the usb stick (and thought it to be
the livecd ;) and everything worked fine...

yoyo

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Eddie Mihalow Jr]

YoYo Siska wrote:
> Eddie Mihalow Jr wrote:
>> Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot image to install?
>>
> 
> well, not exactly a PXE boot image... i had to install gentoo on
> thinkpad X41T (no cd) some time ago, and I wasn't able to boot from usb
> directly ( don't really remember why ;) so i dumped the minimal cd on my
> usb stick, copied the kernel and initrd to other machine and booted it
> through PXE, the kernel/initrd found the usb stick (and thought it to be
> the livecd ;) and everything worked fine...
> 
> yoyo
> 
Cool, that's a very interesting way to install!

-- 
Edward A Mihalow Jr
Gentoo! Linux
Mudbug Computers and Networks
Registered Linux User#225662
New Orleans,LA
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[David Relson]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:25:55 -0600
Eddie Mihalow Jr wrote:

...[snip]...

> You are missing the point of Gentoo then. We are NOT a binary distro
> (to repeat ad nauseum). If you want that kind of install, please
> change distros. I do find these other methods of install to be
> interesting though. Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot
> image to install?

I thought the point of gentoo was the ability to customize settings for
optimal performance/ and fit.   I see this customization as starting
during installation and continuing after that.  I also see it as
separate from _how_ the initial installation occurs.

Is it gentoo's goal to make the installation difficult so only a select
group can do the install?  Or is the goal to make gentoo a great
distro?  In the latter case, why not make the installation easy?

David
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Relson wrote:
> Is it gentoo's goal to make the installation difficult so only a select
> group can do the install?  Or is the goal to make gentoo a great
> distro?  In the latter case, why not make the installation easy?

The installation isn't difficult, Gentoo LiveCD or not, I'll elaborate:

- - With Gentoo LiveCD:
* Boot
* Config network and load necessary modules (if it's not done automatically)
* fdisk
* mount
* download and unpack stage tarball
* chroot, config /etc/resolv.conf
* emerge --sync
* choose the correct profile
* config /etc/make.conf
* emerge -e system
* emerge your kernel
* emerge necessary tools
* reboot

- - Any other LiveCD, running linux distro:
* Boot
* Config network and load necessary modules (if it's not done automatically)
* fdisk
* mount
* download and unpack stage tarball
* chroot, config /etc/resolv.conf
* emerge --sync
* choose the correct profile
* config /etc/make.conf
* emerge -e system
* emerge your kernel
* emerge necessary tools
* reboot

OMG, no difference at all, so how is installing with any other LiveCD
harder?

I will say that being able to install Gentoo from any linux
distro/LiveCD makes it unique and special, I will also elaborate:

* To install Windoze, you need to get a copy of Windoze CD
* To install FreeBSD, you need to get a copy of FreeBSD CD
* To install OpenBSD, you need to get a copy of OpenBSD CD
* To install NetBSD, you need to get a copy of NetBSD CD
* To install Solaris, you need to get a copy of Solaris CD
* To install MacOS, you need to get a copy of MacOS CD
* To install Aix, you need a copy of Aix CD
* To install RedHat, you need a copy of RedHat CD
* To install Ubuntu, you need a copy of Ubuntu CD
* etc etc
* To install Gentoo, you need a copy of *any random* linux live CD or
even inside you current Linux

I can understand why you guys think we are so compelled to have a Gentoo
LiveCD, because every other OS does, and to be honest, that is exactly
the reason that stops you guys thinking out of the box, in what way is
being able to install Gentoo from any LiveCD/distro a bad thing? In
everyway it should be considered one of Gentoo's strengths?

- -- Joe

- --
A computer scientist is someone who, when told "go to hell", considers
the "go to" harmful rather than the destination.

GnuPG Key:  0xB14661D9
GnuPG FP:   DE08 57AE A1AD 620C 02AA  CCDD 611B 63AC B146 61D9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHiS43YRtjrLFGYdkRAqt/AJ48NQA7EBWMjNcTE16eTpHT2brQ9ACeKYjS
RvnxTSHvj9p2w1T3I6dViDg=
=u61E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Saturday 12 January 2008, Qian Qiao wrote:
> I can understand why you guys think we are so compelled to have a
> Gentoo LiveCD, because every other OS does, and to be honest, that is
> exactly the reason that stops you guys thinking out of the box, in
> what way is being able to install Gentoo from any LiveCD/distro a bad
> thing? In everyway it should be considered one of Gentoo's strengths?

Joe,

You have hit the nail on the head. The users around here pushing the 
idea to have an install CD just do not get it, and are probably 
*not*able* to think out the box. They can comprehend is "Gentoo = 
Gentoo install CD", precisely because virtually every other OS does it 
this way. And they have been indoctrinated to think this is the only 
way it can work, or they have drunk the PR department Kool-Aid or 
suffer from Red Hat Inc.'s major disease - Not Invented Here syndrome.

I've had hundreds of people pass through my Linux sysadmin courses, and 
guess which concept they have most trouble grasping? It's not how 
initrd works, Xen, or LVM (the usual assumed suspects), it's how do you 
manage to use an Ubuntu LiveCD to fix a broken Red Hat system? Or how 
did I install Red Hat using Ubuntu as a bootstrap system (possible, but 
waaaaaay more trouble than it's worth)

Such people should probably be running Ubuntu or a binary distro as they 
don't fit the profile of gentoo's target audience. Before anyone flames 
me to oblivion for insulting them, it's not an insult. I just recognize 
that you want to buy a high performance passenger car, and gentoo sells 
an experimental plane in kit form.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Norman Rieß]

Alan McKinnon schrieb:
> On Saturday 12 January 2008, Qian Qiao wrote:
>   
>> I can understand why you guys think we are so compelled to have a
>> Gentoo LiveCD, because every other OS does, and to be honest, that is
>> exactly the reason that stops you guys thinking out of the box, in
>> what way is being able to install Gentoo from any LiveCD/distro a bad
>> thing? In everyway it should be considered one of Gentoo's strengths?
>>     
>
> Joe,
>
> You have hit the nail on the head. The users around here pushing the 
> idea to have an install CD just do not get it, and are probably 
> *not*able* to think out the box. They can comprehend is "Gentoo = 
> Gentoo install CD", precisely because virtually every other OS does it 
> this way. And they have been indoctrinated to think this is the only 
> way it can work, or they have drunk the PR department Kool-Aid or 
> suffer from Red Hat Inc.'s major disease - Not Invented Here syndrome.
>
> I've had hundreds of people pass through my Linux sysadmin courses, and 
> guess which concept they have most trouble grasping? It's not how 
> initrd works, Xen, or LVM (the usual assumed suspects), it's how do you 
> manage to use an Ubuntu LiveCD to fix a broken Red Hat system? Or how 
> did I install Red Hat using Ubuntu as a bootstrap system (possible, but 
> waaaaaay more trouble than it's worth)
>
> Such people should probably be running Ubuntu or a binary distro as they 
> don't fit the profile of gentoo's target audience. Before anyone flames 
> me to oblivion for insulting them, it's not an insult. I just recognize 
> that you want to buy a high performance passenger car, and gentoo sells 
> an experimental plane in kit form.
>
>   
I have installed Gentoo in many ways, the old UniversalCD, the LiveCD,
others Distros LiveCD's, from a working Gentooinstallation to a
usb-connected drive which was transferred to boot in a old laptop and so on.
But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.
So your statement "The users around here pushing the idea to have an
install CD just do not get it, and are probably *not*able* to think out
the box." is clearly not bulletproof.

Norman
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

Norman Rieß ha scritto:

> I have installed Gentoo in many ways, the old UniversalCD, the LiveCD,
> others Distros LiveCD's, from a working Gentooinstallation to a
> usb-connected drive which was transferred to boot in a old laptop and so on.
> But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.

Any practical reason for that?

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Norman Rieß]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 466 bytes --]

b.n. schrieb:
> Norman Rieß ha scritto:
>
>   
>> I have installed Gentoo in many ways, the old UniversalCD, the LiveCD,
>> others Distros LiveCD's, from a working Gentooinstallation to a
>> usb-connected drive which was transferred to boot in a old laptop and so on.
>> But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.
>>     
>
> Any practical reason for that?
>
> m.
>   
No, only psychological, political, philosophical ones.

Norman

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 865 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

Norman Rieß wrote:
> b.n. schrieb:
>> Norman Rieß ha scritto:
>>
>>   
>>> I have installed Gentoo in many ways, the old UniversalCD, the LiveCD,
>>> others Distros LiveCD's, from a working Gentooinstallation to a
>>> usb-connected drive which was transferred to boot in a old laptop and so on.
>>> But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.
>>>     
>>
>> Any practical reason for that?
>>
>> m.
>>   
> No, only psychological, political, philosophical ones.
>
> Norman

I agree.  While Gentoo can be installed, fixed or whatever without a
install CD, it is the first thing a person looks for to install from.  I
guess one way to look at it is this, someone looking to install Mandriva
wouldn't be looking for anything else but a Mandriva CD.  It's just
logical to me.  Heck, even though I am on the slowest dial-up I have
even seen, I still keep the latest install CD laying around just in
case.  I also have a old Knoppix tho.   o_O

Maybe things will get back on track soon.

Dale

:-)  :-)
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1157 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:35:55 +0100, b.n. wrote:

> > But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.  
> 
> Any practical reason for that?

It is a lot more comfortable for the first-time installer. One of the
problems with mixing components for various sources is knowing where to
turn for help when things go wrong. A single source means a single point
of contact, and no chance of each supplier blaming the other's component.

While a Gentoo install CD is not essential for installing Gentoo, it is a
good thing to have. It also allows you to install without a network
connection if you have a single CD containing the handbook, tools,
portage snapshot and stage files. That's how I installed my new desktop
last year, because the install CD didn't support my network card (nor did
the latest stable kernel).

So while an official install disc is not necessary for installation for
many people, it is a part of what Gentoo should offer. Note that I'm
referring to what is now called the minimal CD, the GUI installer CD is
still a waste of resources IMO.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I distinctly remember forgetting that.

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:35:55 +0100, b.n. wrote:
> 
>> > But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.  
>> 
>> Any practical reason for that?
> 
> It is a lot more comfortable for the first-time installer.

Why's that?

> One of the 
> problems with mixing components for various sources is knowing where to
> turn for help when things go wrong. A single source means a single point
> of contact, and no chance of each supplier blaming the other's component.

In theory, that's true. But can you point to bugs, mailing list
submissions or maybe forum posts, which indicate that there are
problems because something's done in a chroot originating from a
non-Gentoo system which would not exist, if the chroot were started
from a Gentoo system (the Gentoo Install CD)?

> While a Gentoo install CD is not essential for installing Gentoo, it is a
> good thing to have.

Depends. I'd rather say, that it is rather superfluous.

> It also allows you to install without a network 
> connection if you have a single CD containing the handbook, tools,
> portage snapshot and stage files. 

How do you get that stuff (the Install CD)? By downloading? Why
can't you download the handbook, snapshot and stage tar ball as
well at that time? And what "tools" are you talking about? fdisk?
chroot?

> So while an official install disc is not necessary for installation for
> many people, it is a part of what Gentoo should offer. 

I disagree. Maybe it's a bonus if it's offered, but then it "always"
has to be up-to-date. And that, obviously, cannot be done right now.
So I'd rather say, that it would be better, if there were no install
CD at all.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
He is considered a most graceful speaker who can say nothing in the most words.


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dale]

Michael Schmarck wrote:
>
> < SNIP >
>
> How do you get that stuff (the Install CD)? By downloading? Why
> can't you download the handbook, snapshot and stage tar ball as
> well at that time? And what "tools" are you talking about? fdisk?
> chroot?
> < SNIP >
>
> Michael Schmarck
>   

Actually, I order mine off the net.  It would take over a week to
download a CD over this crappy dial-up and this crappy dial-up is all I
can get right now.  DSL is coming tho.  I can actually order the CD and
get it faster through the mail that I can download it.  Go figure.

Dale

:-)  :-) 
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1822 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:00:20 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:

> > It is a lot more comfortable for the first-time installer.
> 
> Why's that?

Because a first-time installer benefits from the confidence given by
using an official install disc.

> > It also allows you to install without a network 
> > connection if you have a single CD containing the handbook, tools,
> > portage snapshot and stage files. 
> 
> How do you get that stuff (the Install CD)? By downloading? Why
> can't you download the handbook, snapshot and stage tar ball as
> well at that time? And what "tools" are you talking about? fdisk?
> chroot?

Everything needed can be obtained by downloading one ISO image and
burning it to CD. There's no need for extra trips back the the netted
computer to fetch things you discover you need after reading the
handbook, or partway through the install.
 
> 
> > So while an official install disc is not necessary for installation
> > for many people, it is a part of what Gentoo should offer. 
> 
> I disagree. Maybe it's a bonus if it's offered, but then it "always"
> has to be up-to-date. And that, obviously, cannot be done right now.
> So I'd rather say, that it would be better, if there were no install
> CD at all.

But it can be done. The basic CD is a minimal live CD with portage
snapshots and stage tarballs, which is relatively easy to keep up to
date. What is holding the process back in the insistence on including a
full desktop and graphical installer on the CD, which is a complete
waste of effort IMO.

I would prefer releng to concentrate on producing the traditional style
minimal CD, with the installer project releasing their own discs based on
this when they are able.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

When you choke a smurf, what color does it turn?

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:00:20 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:
> 
>> > It is a lot more comfortable for the first-time installer.
>> 
>> Why's that?
> 
> Because a first-time installer benefits from the confidence given by
> using an official install disc.

I don't understand that. What confidence? To install Gentoo,
you need a way to partition your storage, create filesystems
and chroot. That can easily be done by any live CD.

> 
>> > It also allows you to install without a network 
>> > connection if you have a single CD containing the handbook, tools,
>> > portage snapshot and stage files. 
>> 
>> How do you get that stuff (the Install CD)? By downloading? Why
>> can't you download the handbook, snapshot and stage tar ball as
>> well at that time? And what "tools" are you talking about? fdisk?
>> chroot?
> 
> Everything needed can be obtained by downloading one ISO image and
> burning it to CD. 

Well.

> There's no need for extra trips back the the netted 
> computer to fetch things you discover you need after reading the
> handbook, or partway through the install.

The same argument can be held against the install CD as well.

>> I disagree. Maybe it's a bonus if it's offered, but then it "always"
>> has to be up-to-date. And that, obviously, cannot be done right now.
>> So I'd rather say, that it would be better, if there were no install
>> CD at all.
> 
> But it can be done.

It's not worth the effort, though, as far as I'm concerned.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
"But what we need to know is, do people want nasally-insertable computers?"

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 757 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:24:52 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:

> > Because a first-time installer benefits from the confidence given by
> > using an official install disc.  
> 
> I don't understand that. What confidence? To install Gentoo,
> you need a way to partition your storage, create filesystems
> and chroot. That can easily be done by any live CD.

Assuming you know what you are doing. If you've ever tried to help a
number of less confident users through it, you'd know what I mean.

While I don't disagree that a Gentoo live CD is absolutely necessary, you
seem to be taking the argument further, saying that Gentoo should not
have its own live CD. Why?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Is it a bigger crime to rob a bank or to open one?

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> Assuming you know what you are doing. If you've ever tried to help a
> number of less confident users through it, you'd know what I mean.
> 
> While I don't disagree that a Gentoo live CD is absolutely necessary, you
> seem to be taking the argument further, saying that Gentoo should not
> have its own live CD. Why?

Indeed, while as I've posted earlier in the list that users should free
their mind, and not be too dependent on the Gentoo's LiveCD, I do see
the value in users trying to contribute to the project by making a
LiveCD, it's fairly beneficial to Gentoo:

* Devs can still focus on the tree, on portage itself and/or other
aspects of gentoo
* This user developed CD will indeed open up more possibilities and give
others more choice, without affecting the Gentoo magic touch if handled
correctly.

There are a few drawbacks and concerns, although it's much too early for
some of them to become real concerns
* QA. It's quite typical that if this CD fails in some rare cases, users
will blame Gentoo
* Automated installer or not, if there's this installer, how to balance
between customization and freedom, I'm sure we all remember the "auto
partition" option of the red hat CDs, and the headache it caused :D
* Release cycle?
* How much should be included on the CD? if we were to cater
networkingless installation, a CD will only be enough for a minimal system.

The lists above are by no means complete, but hopefully this thread
sparks some ideas and interesting discussions in the list, which I, for
one, have missed :)

- -- Joe


- --
A computer scientist is someone who, when told "go to hell", considers
the "go to" harmful rather than the destination.

GnuPG Key:  0xB14661D9
GnuPG FP:   DE08 57AE A1AD 620C 02AA  CCDD 611B 63AC B146 61D9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHinObYRtjrLFGYdkRAomAAJwMrBTH5IQ08UoY309N1VIJ8IyH0gCg6UpD
sQ1d0Gc1Eq0ROGqSDYMypHI=
=nLmA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:24:52 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:
> 
>> > Because a first-time installer benefits from the confidence given by
>> > using an official install disc.
>> 
>> I don't understand that. What confidence? To install Gentoo,
>> you need a way to partition your storage, create filesystems
>> and chroot. That can easily be done by any live CD.
> 
> Assuming you know what you are doing.

Of course. And if you don't, then you should get some clue (maybe
by reading the wonderful documentation).

But if you still don't know what you're doing, then the Install
CD would also be of no help at all for you.

> If you've ever tried to help a 
> number of less confident users through it, you'd know what I mean.

And why should there be a difference, if they start from a GRML
CD compared to a Gentoo CD?

> While I don't disagree that a Gentoo live CD is absolutely necessary, you
> seem to be taking the argument further, saying that Gentoo should not
> have its own live CD. Why?

Because it's unnecessary. It adds stuff to the "Gentoo Environment"
which needs to be supported. And it barely adds anything useful

Michael

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 13, 2008 8:24 PM, Michael Schmarck
<michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de> wrote:
> >> So I'd rather say, that it would be better, if there were no install
> >> CD at all.
> >
> > But it can be done.
>
> It's not worth the effort, though, as far as I'm concerned.

Since your are not concerned about releasing them, you should find no
issue to let others do it. It is the community spirit, when folks add
a new way to do something, just enlarging the panel of possibilities
without negative impact on existing solutions, even if it doesn't suit
your own needs, since you still have the possibility to setup your
system by the older way,  there is no reason to prevent motivated
people from implementing their alternative solution.

For PXE, GRML as well as gentoo minimal cd installations, what is
mostly important is freedom to choose :)


Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

Galevsky ha scritto:
> On Jan 13, 2008 8:24 PM, Michael Schmarck
> <michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de> wrote:
>>>> So I'd rather say, that it would be better, if there were no install
>>>> CD at all.
>>> But it can be done.
>> It's not worth the effort, though, as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> Since your are not concerned about releasing them, you should find no
> issue to let others do it. It is the community spirit, when folks add
> a new way to do something, just enlarging the panel of possibilities
> without negative impact on existing solutions, even if it doesn't suit
> your own needs, since you still have the possibility to setup your
> system by the older way,  there is no reason to prevent motivated
> people from implementing their alternative solution.

Of course there is no reason to prevent people to implement new
solutions. New solutions are always welcome: this is what open source is
for. :)

However, I personally think it's a waste of time, and it could possibly
put unnecessary blame on Gentoo. And you are the living proof of it.

Let me explain. You began complaining because the Gentoo live cd
*exists*, but it is out of date and didn't support your hardware. It's a
reasonable complain in the assumption you need the Gentoo cd (and you
can't do with anything else): you of course want your hardware to be
supported by the medium installation.

Now, imagine the official Gentoo live cd *never existed*. You probably
just would have picked up some cd you knew supported your system (say,
latest Ubuntu) and installed using that. No complaining, no discussions,
everyone happy.

See? Having the Gentoo live cd *was wrong from the beginning*. It put
another fairly complex piece of software to support on developer
shoulders, offered vanishingly little benefit, and when it fails it
immediately puts blame on Gentoo: "hey this cd doesn't support my
hardware, wtf" that can offset potential users.

The reason other distro have complex live cds for installing is that
they *need that*. Gentoo does not need this additional complexity.
Nevertheless a live cd there was, but as you experienced, it's more the
trouble it causes than that it solves.

And not having a live cd on which Gentoo is obliged to depend is not a
bug: sir, it's a feature! The live cd didn't support my Macbook Pro
networking. Well, fine: Kubuntu did. I had a Kubuntu 7.10 cd around,
booted from that, no hassle at all. Other distros have to support their
own live cd, and if it fails, installation is impossible. With Gentoo,
we have the full monty of live cds to choose within. It's like a distro
with infinite installers.

You are free to create a live cd for Gentoo install, but you're doing
nothing new nor particularly useful. You'll just add one to the list. Why?

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 14, 2008 1:19 AM, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me explain. You began complaining because the Gentoo live cd
> *exists*, but it is out of date and didn't support your hardware. It's a
> reasonable complain in the assumption you need the Gentoo cd (and you
> can't do with anything else): you of course want your hardware to be
> supported by the medium installation.
>
> Now, imagine the official Gentoo live cd *never existed*. You probably
> just would have picked up some cd you knew supported your system (say,
> latest Ubuntu) and installed using that. No complaining, no discussions,
> everyone happy.

You are right.

> See? Having the Gentoo live cd *was wrong from the beginning*. It put
> another fairly complex piece of software to support on developer
> shoulders, offered vanishingly little benefit, and when it fails it
> immediately puts blame on Gentoo: "hey this cd doesn't support my
> hardware, wtf" that can offset potential users.

Still right.

> The reason other distro have complex live cds for installing is that
> they *need that*. Gentoo does not need this additional complexity.
> Nevertheless a live cd there was, but as you experienced, it's more the
> trouble it causes than that it solves.

I disagree. Gentoo needs it too. Because *THE* point that made me love
Gentoo *in the FIRST second*, was: "GOD !!! look at this wonderful
handbook !!!! look at that so didactic installation way !!! Let's boot
the minimal CD and burn a full LiveCD !"

And I was so happy to get my minimal/live CD's that I think "Yeah, a
very nice distro, taking your hand from the beginning to bring
knowledge step-by-step, providing all that you need... software and
amazing doc".

> And not having a live cd on which Gentoo is obliged to depend is not a
> bug: sir, it's a feature! The live cd didn't support my Macbook Pro
> networking. Well, fine: Kubuntu did. I had a Kubuntu 7.10 cd around,
> booted from that, no hassle at all. Other distros have to support their
> own live cd, and if it fails, installation is impossible. With Gentoo,
> we have the full monty of live cds to choose within. It's like a distro
> with infinite installers.

Yes. It is a feature.  As well as the possibility to use minimal/live
CD. Look at http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/staffing-needs/ and
read the first task requiring staff: "1  	accessibility  	 Requested
on November 19, 2006 by William Hubbs: Gentoo's accessibility project
is in need of help with things such as ebuild maintenance, kernel
hacking, and *LiveCD creation*. We're also in need of someone to
assist with bug solving."

also at the so wonderful handbook, step "2. Choosing the Right
Installation Medium"...

The feature is *you can* start from any booted linux to setup your
Gentoo kernel. Right. But not "there is no Gentoo liveCD and it is
what we want".


> You are free to create a live cd for Gentoo install, but you're doing
> nothing new nor particularly useful. You'll just add one to the list. Why?

Because I want. It is sufficient for me. Further details ? I would
like to bring the excitation to burn a Gentoo CD to noobs and people
that are pleased to get their CD from Gentoo world. And I want a
liveCD to make live demo in my linux promotional association, to show
how easy emerge is, how very nicely the rc are handled (not based on
naming as debian does) and so on...


Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

Galevsky ha scritto:
>> The reason other distro have complex live cds for installing is that
>> they *need that*. Gentoo does not need this additional complexity.
>> Nevertheless a live cd there was, but as you experienced, it's more the
>> trouble it causes than that it solves.
> 
> I disagree. Gentoo needs it too. Because *THE* point that made me love
> Gentoo *in the FIRST second*, was: "GOD !!! look at this wonderful
> handbook !!!! look at that so didactic installation way !!! Let's boot
> the minimal CD and burn a full LiveCD !"

What would have been different with:
"GOD !!! look at this wonderful
> handbook !!!! look at that so didactic installation way !!! Let's boot
> a live CD and start installing!"

I'm extremly dense probably, since I really don't get it.

> And I was so happy to get my minimal/live CD's that I think "Yeah, a
> very nice distro, taking your hand from the beginning to bring
> knowledge step-by-step, providing all that you need... software and
> amazing doc".

Again, what would have been different in your happiness with another cd?

> Yes. It is a feature.  As well as the possibility to use minimal/live
> CD. Look at http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/staffing-needs/ and
> read the first task requiring staff: "1  	accessibility  	 Requested
> on November 19, 2006 by William Hubbs: Gentoo's accessibility project
> is in need of help with things such as ebuild maintenance, kernel
> hacking, and *LiveCD creation*. We're also in need of someone to
> assist with bug solving."

So, without the live cd, the accessibility project would have a thing
less to solve. I can't see how having more troubles and no advantage is
a positive thing, but again: I'm probably extremly dense.

> Because I want. It is sufficient for me. Further details ? I would
> like to bring the excitation to burn a Gentoo CD to noobs and people
> that are pleased to get their CD from Gentoo world. 

We're excited by different things :)

> And I want a
> liveCD to make live demo in my linux promotional association, to show
> how easy emerge is, how very nicely the rc are handled (not based on
> naming as debian does) and so on...

Beautiful, but this has nothing to do with the need of a gentoo install
cd. However a Gentoo demo cd is a nice project. Happy hacking, anyway!

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 14, 2008 5:54 PM, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> We're excited by different things :)

No doubt :)

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:07:34 +0100, Galevsky wrote:


> Because I want. It is sufficient for me. Further details ? I would like
> to bring the excitation to burn a Gentoo CD to noobs and people that are
> pleased to get their CD from Gentoo world. And I want a liveCD to make
> live demo in my linux promotional association, to show how easy emerge
> is, how very nicely the rc are handled (not based on naming as debian
> does) and so on...
>

Which adds more momentum to Gentoo by drawing in more users which 
attracts more developers -- it snowballs.


-Thufir

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sunday 13 January 2008, Norman Rieß wrote:
> I have installed Gentoo in many ways, the old UniversalCD, the
> LiveCD, others Distros LiveCD's, from a working Gentooinstallation to
> a usb-connected drive which was transferred to boot in a old laptop
> and so on. But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.
> So your statement "The users around here pushing the idea to have an
> install CD just do not get it, and are probably *not*able* to think
> out the box." is clearly not bulletproof.

You miss my point. 

The thread is about users insisting that Gentoo must have an installer 
because "how else would one install Gentoo?" which is patently not 
true.

My comment was to highlight that people who don't see the truth of that 
probably can't think out the box. I didn't pull this comment out my ass 
either, it's based on several hundred observations of me personally, in 
face-to-face situations, explaining to people how a typical Linux 
install process works and observing how many get it and how many don't.

Please don't respond to my posts in isolation, treating them as 10 
second sound bites. They are in a thread, and part of a larger context.

If you want a Gentoo installer then by all means go ahead and make one. 
Or you can pay someone to make one for you. That is how FLOSS works 
after all.

But is not justifiable to make the creation of such an installer a 
top-priority for Gentoo, as such a thing ALREADY EXISTS. It just 
doesn't have a Gentoo "G" logo on it.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Norman Rieß]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1705 bytes --]

Alan McKinnon schrieb:
> On Sunday 13 January 2008, Norman Rieß wrote:
>   
>> I have installed Gentoo in many ways, the old UniversalCD, the
>> LiveCD, others Distros LiveCD's, from a working Gentooinstallation to
>> a usb-connected drive which was transferred to boot in a old laptop
>> and so on. But i still think a Gentoo-Install-CD/DVD is a good thing.
>> So your statement "The users around here pushing the idea to have an
>> install CD just do not get it, and are probably *not*able* to think
>> out the box." is clearly not bulletproof.
>>     
>
> You miss my point. 
>
> The thread is about users insisting that Gentoo must have an installer 
> because "how else would one install Gentoo?" which is patently not 
> true.
>
> My comment was to highlight that people who don't see the truth of that 
> probably can't think out the box. I didn't pull this comment out my ass 
> either, it's based on several hundred observations of me personally, in 
> face-to-face situations, explaining to people how a typical Linux 
> install process works and observing how many get it and how many don't.
>
> Please don't respond to my posts in isolation, treating them as 10 
> second sound bites. They are in a thread, and part of a larger context.
>
> If you want a Gentoo installer then by all means go ahead and make one. 
> Or you can pay someone to make one for you. That is how FLOSS works 
> after all.
>
> But is not justifiable to make the creation of such an installer a 
> top-priority for Gentoo, as such a thing ALREADY EXISTS. It just 
> doesn't have a Gentoo "G" logo on it.
>
>   
I think we have a different understandig about this thread.

Norman

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2079 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Eddie Mihalow Jr]

David Relson wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:25:55 -0600
> Eddie Mihalow Jr wrote:
> 
> ...[snip]...
> 
>> You are missing the point of Gentoo then. We are NOT a binary distro
>> (to repeat ad nauseum). If you want that kind of install, please
>> change distros. I do find these other methods of install to be
>> interesting though. Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot
>> image to install?
> 
> I thought the point of gentoo was the ability to customize settings for
> optimal performance/ and fit.   I see this customization as starting
> during installation and continuing after that.  I also see it as
> separate from _how_ the initial installation occurs.
> 
> Is it gentoo's goal to make the installation difficult so only a select
> group can do the install?  Or is the goal to make gentoo a great
> distro?  In the latter case, why not make the installation easy?
> 
> David
I'm sorry, but this is such a well-worn path and has been beat to death. 
This is not Ubuntu or yadda yadda yadda. This Gentoo. Maybe this is the 
price of admission. If it is, well too bad. If all the Gentoo users that 
fill the mailinglists and forums
have been able to install Gentoo with the aid of  the best docs, you 
should be able too. Gentoo does not make it's goal to be difficult. 
Because it is different than the way YOU think it should be. It is what 
it is. Not what you want or will be happy with? Go somewhere else.

-- 
Edward A Mihalow Jr
Mudbug Computers and Networks
Gentoo! Linux
Registered Linux User#225662
New Orleans,LA
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Shaochun Wang]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 07:25:55AM -0600, Eddie Mihalow Jr wrote:
> distros. I do find these other methods of install to be interesting though.
> Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot image to install?
>
In fact, the Gentoo system of my current desktop machine was installed
by using PXE boot method! I need 64 bit operating system. But the Gentoo
livecd can't boot my system.

BTW, my computer is Dell optiplex 745.

-- 
Shaochun Wang <scwang@ios.ac.cn>

Jabber:	fungusw@jabber.org
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Eddie Mihalow Jr]

Shaochun Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 07:25:55AM -0600, Eddie Mihalow Jr wrote:
>> distros. I do find these other methods of install to be interesting though.
>> Has anyone on this list ever used a PXE boot image to install?
>>
> In fact, the Gentoo system of my current desktop machine was installed
> by using PXE boot method! I need 64 bit operating system. But the Gentoo
> livecd can't boot my system.
> 
> BTW, my computer is Dell optiplex 745.
> 
Great! Did you already have a image built or use the PXE in another way?

-- 
Edward A Mihalow Jr
Mudbug Computers and Networks
Gentoo! Linux
Registered Linux User#225662
New Orleans,LA
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Qian Qiao]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:15:49 -0500
David Relson <relson@osagesoftware.com> wrote:
> I used the Gentoo LiveCD when I started with Gentoo in 2006.  Prior
> Linux experience covered 8 or so years with Slackware, RedHat, and
> Mandrake.
> 
> The installation was not smooth.  My recollection is that the GUI
> installer asked for the same information multiple times and there were
> problems installing packages from the CD's.  I ended up with a partial
> install that needed manual fixing.  The process was painful, not
> smooth, but I was able to get Gentoo up and running.
> 
> When I upgraded from 32-bits to 64-bits, I started with the minimal CD
> and did a manual upgrade.  The process worked well though it was time
> consuming (since I used my old world file to ensure I had 64 bit
> versions of everything). 
> 
> By contrast, I've done multiple Mandrake/Mandriva installs, most
> recently about 6 months ago (on an old laptop).  The Mandriva install
> was dead simple and it was up and running within an hour.
> 
> IMHO, for new users to Gentoo having an easy to use installer and a
> current LiveCD (no more than 6 months old) is very important.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> David

IMO, comparing a source distro with a binary distro in terms of installation
time is a bit unfair.

There are a couple of other things you also have to look at:
* Binary distros vendors need to optimize for compatibility. Take i686 as an
example, the same binary might be running on Pentium III, Pentium 4, Athlon and
a series of other hardwares. The advantage is quite obvious, if you ask for
vendor support, they know exactly how the software is compiled, what compiler
flag they used, what patches they applied. The disadvantage is also obvious,
say a particular compiler flag can increase the performance of the software on
your architecture, but breaks compatibility of the binaries with other
architectures, do you think the vendor will have that flag set?
* Source distros, on the contrary, lets you control how you want your software
to be build, what flags to use etc etc, at the price of much much longer
compilation time and much harder for vendors to support you. In someway, you
can even think that source distros lets to you imprint you personality onto your
system, you can go for aggressive -O3, or just optimize size for -Os, you can
- -mfpmath=sse if you know you have the hardware.

Back to the installation CD issue, undoubtably, having a nice working
installation CD for gentoo is desirable, but is it really needed? We are here
to do what we are best at.

LiveCD creators, Knoppix, for example, are good at creating liveCDs and keeping
hardware support on those CDs up-to-date etc etc, we should take advantage of
it.

Gentoo has a huge package repository, I'd much rather see the devs focus on
making that better, cos that's what they are good at.

There's no need to look at different distros with borders and boundaries and
have you mind bound on the concept that "I need to use a gentoo CD to install
gentoo".

All these distros/liveCDs are here to help us get the job done, isn't that what
free software is about? Isn't that what choice is about?

- -- Joe


- -- 
A computer scientist is someone who, when told "go to hell", considers 
the "go to" harmful rather than the destination.

GnuPG FP: DE08 57AE A1AD 620C 02AA  CCDD 611B 63AC B146 61D9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHh3bQYRtjrLFGYdkRAk/AAKCxkBz3qh06b7trQANYJfttVdJzhACeLYmN
KAp9ds76DiiQv+Dw3spyBhQ=
=2Wr/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 11 January 2008, Qian Qiao wrote:
> ack to the installation CD issue, undoubtably, having a nice working
> installation CD for gentoo is desirable, but is it really needed? We
> are here to do what we are best at.
>
> LiveCD creators, Knoppix, for example, are good at creating liveCDs
> and keeping hardware support on those CDs up-to-date etc etc, we
> should take advantage of it.
>
> Gentoo has a huge package repository, I'd much rather see the devs
> focus on making that better, cos that's what they are good at.

Reading this, I had a thought: Most of the stuff available in gentoo 
comes from some upstream place in the grand Free Software tradition.

Considering that an installation LiveCD is really just a temporary 
bootable image that writes stuff to the disk (and that stuff happily 
turns out to be a permanent bootable image), how about we just treat 
Knoppix as an upstream package and add a relatively simple program to 
do the installation?

Essentially, it will ask some questions and unpack a stage 3/4 then tell 
the user to go and read 'man emerge'

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[James]

Michael Schmarck <michael.schmarck <at> habmalnefrage.de> writes:


> Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo. I
> also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast. 

Folks new to gentoo, would find it suspicious, for a distro not to have
it's own install..... Other forks of Gentoo have their install methods.

For those new to gentoo, it's like getting married without a honeymoon....
IMHO.


> To install Gentoo, I'd boot my favorite "rescue system" (GRMl nowadays,
> Knoppix back then, but IMO Knoppix is too "fat" for *this* *task*)
> and install from there. No need for an install CD.

OK, fine, then why doesn't of the persons that says it so easy, just take
a GRMl (or whatever)  cd and add the minimal (non gui) stuff to the same 
cd and make a simple to use 'install cd' for gentoo that is unofficial?
Wouldn't it be easy for all of those whose answer this installation 
question over and over and over, to make a basic install cd on top of GRMl
once and be done with it? After all very little would change, except when
the GRMl cd changes..... Time the updates with changes int he 
GRMl cd....


> As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped
> without a loss.

Well, I differ with this statement 100%. What, IMHO, needs to happened is the
whole install process be changed to a minimal working kernel and basic tools.
Then you fork the install in the direction as to what the system is to be 
used for: embedded-gentoo, firewall, bridge, managed switch, server 
(mail, web, dns, terminal etc etc) and last the complicated nightmare of 
a workstation  (kde vs gnome vs etc etc).

Of of the best features of Gentoo, is how easy maintaining and managing a 
server is. 99.999% of the issues with updates to gentoo, are related to
the wide variety of packages available for workstations......?
This approach could be used to build a basic installation with support for a
wide variety of hardware, within a particular architecture. Then
as the amount of installation packages are increase, logically break the
installation across multiple (media) CDs. For example something like this

Basic system             complete packaging            workstation
kernel, baselayout...    <needs to be discussed>       X, kde, gnome, 


(very crude idea that needs to be refined.)

It's the graphics and installation of thousands of various gui-packages 
(and using a gui that installs on any machine) that is the nightmare, IMHO.

So yes, drop the (graphical) liveCD 0ption and create  installation
method(s) that begin simple (therefore easy to maintain and update)
and becomes more involved depending on what you are trying to build from
gentoo...... Some of the x86 embedded devices, such a GNAP, use
older versions of compilers and sources. Their install could fork
much earlier, depending on the current state of the architecture.
Or maybe the necessary cross-compile environment would be set up,
along a particular fork.


A robust, well defined installation semantic, is fundamental to
any successful distro, IMHO. Exactly what that semantic entails
should be widely discussed, refined for ease of maintenance and something
that uniquely leverages Gentoo's strengths. 

As processors continue to  shrink and have a lower power consumption, 
the natural migration to mobile (embedded systems) is the future, 
methinks. Gentoo's strength in the embedded space combined with 
being a source code flexible system puts gentoo in the forefront of 
this revolution. However, if installing gentoo, when asked, gives
dozens of different answers, depending on a variety of asymmetrical, 
emotionally charged opinions, then the distro will  continue to 
languish, and be a reclusive club for experts, or those
with very think skin (to which I belong <you pick>)....

For example, when show skiing recently, I met a kid that had a camera
mounted on top of his helmet connecting a coax cable (and power) to
a very small (temperature rated) embedded system. He just replaced
the SD media when he runs out of disk space. That's the kind of project
where embedded gentoo and gentoo workstations need  "seemless"
integration.

The greater Gentoo community should decide what is best for gentoo and 
the installation semantic is the most important piece of 
advertisment/marketing that the  Gentoo organization will ever 
devise, IMHO.


James




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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Mark Knecht]

On Jan 12, 2008 12:52 PM, James <wireless@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> Michael Schmarck <michael.schmarck <at> habmalnefrage.de> writes:
>
>
> > Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo. I
> > also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast.
>
> Folks new to gentoo, would find it suspicious, for a distro not to have
> it's own install..... Other forks of Gentoo have their install methods.
<SNIP>
>
> So yes, drop the (graphical) liveCD 0ption and create  installation
> method(s) that begin simple (therefore easy to maintain and update)
> and ...

I haven't followed this whole thread but isn't this idea EXACTLY what
the Gentoo install process was 6-7 years ago? It's how I got started
and it worked great for me. A simple boot CD, a text console, and then
start copying tar files to get up to date stuff to work with. The few
times I've done an install using newer install CDs I've switched to a
text console, started ssh, and logged in from another machine where I
Can copy/paste the install commands from a browser into my ssh
terminal. Works great every time for me.

In the old days there were folks who wanted to do stage 1 or stage 2
installs. I never did one. Stage 3 always worked great for me.

For the record I am one of the newbie types that I think someone
mentioned as getting lucky and getting it right. That said, after 6-7
years of using Gentoo, I'm still a newbie. I will be forever. I don't
want to dig into any Linux distro as much as I want to use it. I'm not
a sys admin, except for the 6 Gentoo machines at home. I work for
myself and don't deal with offices but I Was never a sys admin and I
don't program in any language and I Still manage to make Gentoo work
for me. The power of Gentoo, for me, is the ease and quality of the
install process. I use a LOT of non-stable, under development audio
recording packages. I really appreciate how well I can do this on
Gentoo.

I hope the Gentoo devs can get back to the roots of this distro. Rock
solid install. Rock solid operation. High availability of interesting
software either through portage directly or through overlays like
proaudio.

Just my 2 cents and no matter what nothing in this email should ever
be construed as anything except the greatest respect and reverence for
those who make this disrto run.

Cheers,
Mark
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Saturday 12 January 2008, James wrote:
> > As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be
> > dropped without a loss.
>
> Well, I differ with this statement 100%. What, IMHO, needs to
> happened is the whole install process be changed to a minimal working
> kernel and basic tools. Then you fork the install in the direction as
> to what the system is to be used for: embedded-gentoo, firewall,
> bridge, managed switch, server (mail, web, dns, terminal etc etc) and
> last the complicated nightmare of a workstation  (kde vs gnome vs etc
> etc).

Excellent idea. When can we expect your first alpha-release?

When we have rough consensus and your running code, we can include your 
project in the list of workable install methods.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1098 bytes --]

Am Sonntag, 13. Januar 2008 schrieb Alan McKinnon:
> On Saturday 12 January 2008, James wrote:
> > > As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be
> > > dropped without a loss.
> >
> > Well, I differ with this statement 100%. What, IMHO, needs to
> > happened is the whole install process be changed to a minimal working
> > kernel and basic tools. Then you fork the install in the direction as
> > to what the system is to be used for: embedded-gentoo, firewall,
> > bridge, managed switch, server (mail, web, dns, terminal etc etc) and
> > last the complicated nightmare of a workstation  (kde vs gnome vs etc
> > etc).
>
> Excellent idea. When can we expect your first alpha-release?
>
> When we have rough consensus and your running code, we can include your
> project in the list of workable install methods.

And while where at it: Get those stage1 installs back into the Handbook. I did 
a stage3 install 2 weeks ago and it was a nightmare. One needs to recompile 
nearly everything afterwards, so stage3 doesn't make any difference.

Bye...

	Dirk

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sunday 13 January 2008, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:

> And while where at it: Get those stage1 installs back into the
> Handbook. I did a stage3 install 2 weeks ago and it was a nightmare.
> One needs to recompile nearly everything afterwards, so stage3
> doesn't make any difference.

IIRC, they were removed because being in the official handbook, people 
used them. Then caused endless traffic on endless forums and lists when 
they did it wrong (mostly because they didn't know enough yet about the 
process and followed bad ricing advice).

The stage 1 and 2 tarballs are still available - I used them recently to 
build a custom stage 3 with catalyst, and the stage 1/2 install pages 
are still available in an archive somewhere. So they're not gone, just 
hard to find for those still finding their way around. Which is 
probably not a bad thing overall IMHO


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 623 bytes --]

Am Sonntag, 13. Januar 2008 schrieb Alan McKinnon:

> IIRC, they were removed because being in the official handbook, people
> used them. Then caused endless traffic on endless forums and lists when
> they did it wrong (mostly because they didn't know enough yet about the
> process and followed bad ricing advice).

Of course, if one does a stage1 install she should either follow the handbock 
word by word or know what she's doing.

> The stage 1 and 2 tarballs are still available

I know. Just wanted to know what this stage3 thing is all about. Next time I 
will use stage1 again :-)

Bye...

	Dirk

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 710 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:08:43 +0100, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:

> And while where at it: Get those stage1 installs back into the
> Handbook. I did a stage3 install 2 weeks ago and it was a nightmare.
> One needs to recompile nearly everything afterwards, so stage3 doesn't
> make any difference.

Except that you can use the system while it is recompiling. I switched to
using Stage 3 installs about three years ago, it's so much easier and
gives you a working system in under an hour. The fact that it spends the
next day or two recompiling in the background, at a nice level of 19,
doesn't detract from that at all.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Sevareid`s Law: The chief cause of problems is solutions.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 250 bytes --]

Am Sonntag, 13. Januar 2008 schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> Except that you can use the system while it is recompiling.

I can also use the system while doing a stage1 install. Depends on the 
capabilities of the install CD you use.

Bye...

	Dirk

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 407 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:46:18 +0100, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:

> > Except that you can use the system while it is recompiling.  
> 
> I can also use the system while doing a stage1 install. Depends on the 
> capabilities of the install CD you use.

In that case, you're using the live CD system, not the installed system.
It can make a difference.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

And what else floats.....?

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

On Sunday 13 January 2008, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:

> And while where at it: Get those stage1 installs back into the
> Handbook. I did a stage3 install 2 weeks ago and it was a nightmare.
> One needs to recompile nearly everything afterwards, so stage3 doesn't
> make any difference.

You can use Daniel Robbins' stage3s:

http://blog.funtoo.org/2007/12/i-building-gentoo-stages.html

(note: I have not used them yet, so I don't know what their 
compatibility/quality/whatever level is. Anyway, with such a releaser, 
I'd expect them to work quite well, and I'll test them with my next 
Gentoo install).
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Dirk Heinrichs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 562 bytes --]

Am Sonntag, 13. Januar 2008 schrieb Etaoin Shrdlu:

> You can use Daniel Robbins' stage3s:

Why should I? They're likely also built with different use flags than the ones 
I use. Thus I will end up recompiling anyway. Updating the compiler 
recompiled a couple dozen packages before. With a stage1 install I have the 
compiler, binutils and libc versions of my choice right from the beginning 
and don't need to think about which packages have been compiled with an old 
(or just different) compiler, possibly causing trouble later.

Bye...

	Dirk

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

On Sunday 13 January 2008, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 13. Januar 2008 schrieb Etaoin Shrdlu:
> > You can use Daniel Robbins' stage3s:
>
> Why should I? They're likely also built with different use flags than
> the ones I use. Thus I will end up recompiling anyway. 

Ah ok, I wrongly thought yours was more a problem of outdated stage3 
tarballs rather than different USE flags. In this case yes, the best 
option is starting from stage1.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 643 bytes --]

On Monday 14 January 2008 10:48:08 Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
> > > You can use Daniel Robbins' stage3s:
> >
> > Why should I? They're likely also built with different use flags than
> > the ones I use. Thus I will end up recompiling anyway.
>
> Ah ok, I wrongly thought yours was more a problem of outdated stage3
> tarballs rather than different USE flags. In this case yes, the best
> option is starting from stage1.

Not really. emerge -e world from a stage 3 is still both considerably less 
effort than stage 1 and much more reliable. Furthermore stage 1 is completely 
unsupported and for a very good reason.

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Benno Schulenberg]

Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> Furthermore stage 1 is completely unsupported and for a very good
> reason.

Which good reason, Bo?  You seem to know it, so maybe give a link 
somewhere; don't make us guess or search.

Benno
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 14 January 2008, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
> Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> > Furthermore stage 1 is completely unsupported and for a very good
> > reason.
>
> Which good reason, Bo?  You seem to know it, so maybe give a link
> somewhere; don't make us guess or search.

The vast unending stream of completely useless bug reports and requests 
for help from users who had

a) chosen the wrong stage 1 or 2 for their arch
b) set the wrong flags and compile options
c) listened to ricer advice and been left with an unusable system
d) bitch and moan as to why it takes 96 hours to get a bash prompt
e) changed the install commands to "something better" which didn't work 
then consumed too much support time that could have been better spent 
elsewhere, especially since the answer usually turned out to be "don't 
try and be clever, just trash what you already did and do it properly 
with a stage 3"

when all of this was completely avoidable if they had just chosen to 
build from a stage 3 in the first place!

A stage 1 has only one purpose in life - to build a stage 2 and to do it 
in a safe way insulated from any host system.

A stage 2 has only one purpose in life - to provide something that can 
correctly run 'emerge -et system' which produces what you get with a 
stage 3 install (to a degree of course).

So stages 1 and 2 really belong inside catalyst, the more invisible the 
better (as they are just bootstrap mechanisms).

They are still around as catalyst still builds them, if you know where 
to look they are freely downloadable and can be used. But now when the 
user makes a hash of it the community can legitimately tell the user to 
stop wasting their time with unsupported stuff.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· James <wireless@tampabay.rr.com>:

> Michael Schmarck <michael.schmarck <at> habmalnefrage.de> writes:
> 
> 
>> Well, actually, I never used a Gentoo install CD to install Gentoo. I
>> also don't quite understand, why anyone would need such a beast. 
> 
> Folks new to gentoo, would find it suspicious, for a distro not to have
> it's own install.....

Why's that? The documentation should just point to some other
install CDs, if you'd like to call GRML that.

> Other forks of Gentoo have their install methods. 

Nice for them.

> For those new to gentoo, it's like getting married without a honeymoon....
> IMHO.

I don't get that.

>> To install Gentoo, I'd boot my favorite "rescue system" (GRMl nowadays,
>> Knoppix back then, but IMO Knoppix is too "fat" for *this* *task*)
>> and install from there. No need for an install CD.
> 
> OK, fine, then why doesn't of the persons that says it so easy, just take
> a GRMl (or whatever)  cd and add the minimal (non gui) stuff to the same 
> cd and make a simple to use 'install cd' for gentoo that is unofficial?

Why should that be done? GRML (or whatever) come with their own
GUI. And for the installation of Gentoo, the only "GUI" that's
needed, is a terminal.

> Wouldn't it be easy for all of those whose answer this installation 
> question over and over and over, to make a basic install cd on top of GRMl
> once and be done with it?

No. That would outdate as well and wouldn't support newer hardware.

But what would be gained by doing what you suggest?

>> As far as I'm concerned, the Gentoo install CD could easily be dropped
>> without a loss.
> 
> Well, I differ with this statement 100%.

Fine. Why?

> What, IMHO, needs to happened is the 
> whole install process be changed to a minimal working kernel and basic tools.

That's what you get, when you use some other Live CD like Ubuntu or
whatever.

[...]
> the SD media when he runs out of disk space. That's the kind of project
> where embedded gentoo and gentoo workstations need  "seemless"
> integration.

Cool :) But what does that have to do with an installation CD?

Michael Schmarck
-- 
If you don't see why, please stay the fuck away from my code.
        Rusty, in linux-2.6.6/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl        


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

James ha scritto:
> OK, fine, then why doesn't of the persons that says it so easy, just take
> a GRMl (or whatever)  cd and add the minimal (non gui) stuff to the same 
> cd and make a simple to use 'install cd' for gentoo that is unofficial?

Because you don't have to add *anything* to such cd.
-What do you need to install Gentoo? A working Linux live cd with a
terminal and chroot.
-Are a terminal and chroot available on 99.9% of Linux live cds in the
world? Yes.

Since I installed Gentoo actually *only* from non-Gentoo cds in my life
(Knoppix or Kubuntu), I can *guarantee* nothing Gentoo-specific is
needed on such cds.

Sure, a list pointing to good, known live cds could be fine.

> Wouldn't it be easy for all of those whose answer this installation 
> question over and over and over, to make a basic install cd on top of GRMl
> once and be done with it? 

But IT'S ALREADY A BASIC INSTALL CD by itself! :)

> Well, I differ with this statement 100%. What, IMHO, needs to happened is the
> whole install process be changed to a minimal working kernel and basic tools.
> Then you fork the install in the direction as to what the system is to be 
> used for: embedded-gentoo, firewall, bridge, managed switch, server 
> (mail, web, dns, terminal etc etc) and last the complicated nightmare of 
> a workstation  (kde vs gnome vs etc etc).
> 
> Of of the best features of Gentoo, is how easy maintaining and managing a 
> server is. 99.999% of the issues with updates to gentoo, are related to
> the wide variety of packages available for workstations......?
> This approach could be used to build a basic installation with support for a
> wide variety of hardware, within a particular architecture. Then
> as the amount of installation packages are increase, logically break the
> installation across multiple (media) CDs. For example something like this
> 
> Basic system             complete packaging            workstation
> kernel, baselayout...    <needs to be discussed>       X, kde, gnome, 

This is something I disagree completely. Isn't the goal of Gentoo to
give you as much fine-grained as possible control on your system? If we
begin to create "generic" workstation,server etc. installs, we have to
do A LOT of assumptions on what is a workstation, server etc. for
people. What packages and what not. And you are sure that on a community
as idiosyncratic and addicted to fine-tuning like the Gentoo one, you
won't make very much people happy with your assumptions. How many of us,
for example, don't bother with KDE or Gnome completely and build a
Fluxbox or XFCE based workstation (Not me, but I know of many)?

To me the install must start from a minimal set of packages, just to
have a working system able to communicate with the world. From there,
it's the user that chooses. Heck, choosing packages and USE flags is the
fun part of a new Gentoo install. It's when that install becomes *your*
install.

> However, if installing gentoo, when asked, gives
> dozens of different answers, depending on a variety of asymmetrical, 
> emotionally charged opinions, then the distro will  continue to 
> languish, and be a reclusive club for experts, or those
> with very think skin (to which I belong <you pick>)....

Trust me, I'm not an expert nor someone with a thick skin. There's a lot
I don't like of Gentoo, paradoxically one of these things is the time I
have to dedicate to system administration (I know there's nothing I can
do about that, it's just sometimes I'd like to build a sysadmin clone of
myself that does maintaineance when I'm sleeping :) ). I'm not an IT
guy, I'm a biologist that uses his Gentoo machines as desktops and
workstation. And when I started, I was the classical newbie that used
Mandrake for a year. I also still use Kubuntu in my laboratory, because
there I need something that can be installed fast, works out of the box
and that I don't have to mess around later at all.

Simply, Gentoo gives you control and the tools for making this control
logical, if not easy. And has a documentation and community of the best
quality, that's one of the many things that keeps me stick to Gentoo.
Ubuntus are good,slick systems,I sincerely like them: but their
documentation is worse and their community is full of people that are
relatively clueless with respect to the Gentoo community. So much that
often if I have troubles with Kubuntu, the docs I end to read are Gentoo
docs.

"Installing gentoo, when asked", you know, has just one answer: The
Handbook. No dozens of different answers, no asymmetrical and
emotionally charged opinions. It's simple as that: Fire a suitable Linux
live cd and read the handbook.

You can't get much more strict than that.

> The greater Gentoo community should decide what is best for gentoo and 
> the installation semantic is the most important piece of 
> advertisment/marketing that the  Gentoo organization will ever 
> devise, IMHO.

Having such a well done, step by step and detailed installation handbook
 is one of the best marketing tools of Gentoo, from my experience and
that of my friends. Is not that enough as installation semantic?

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 474 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:06:39 +0100, b.n. wrote:

> Because you don't have to add *anything* to such cd.
> -What do you need to install Gentoo? A working Linux live cd with a
> terminal and chroot.
> -Are a terminal and chroot available on 99.9% of Linux live cds in the
> world? Yes.

You also need the handbook, a portage snapshot and a stage tarball. How
many live CDs provide these?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If at first you don't succeed, call it Windows NT.

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:06:39 +0100, b.n. wrote:
> 
>> Because you don't have to add *anything* to such cd.
>> -What do you need to install Gentoo? A working Linux live cd with a
>> terminal and chroot.
>> -Are a terminal and chroot available on 99.9% of Linux live cds in the
>> world? Yes.
> 
> You also need the handbook, a portage snapshot and a stage tarball. How
> many live CDs provide these?

None. But the portage snapshot is best fetched from the web 
anyway, as far as I'm concerned. Same with the handbook, as
it may contain (theoritcal) up-to-the minute corrections.

So, the portage snapshot and handbook don't have to on the
Live CD.

Stage Tarball - well, yes, that's an additional download,
that's true.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
Narrator: Oh, no! He's heading towards Townsville!


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 591 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 15:53:48 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:

> > You also need the handbook, a portage snapshot and a stage tarball.
> > How many live CDs provide these?  
> 
> None. But the portage snapshot is best fetched from the web 
> anyway, as far as I'm concerned. Same with the handbook, as
> it may contain (theoritcal) up-to-the minute corrections.
> 
> So, the portage snapshot and handbook don't have to on the
> Live CD.

No, but it's a lot easier if they are when doing a networkless install.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 43: Genuine imitation

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Ken Gypen]

On 2008-01-13 16:29:15 (+0000), Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 15:53:48 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:
> 
> > > You also need the handbook, a portage snapshot and a stage tarball.
> > > How many live CDs provide these?  
> > 
> > None. But the portage snapshot is best fetched from the web 
> > anyway, as far as I'm concerned. Same with the handbook, as
> > it may contain (theoritcal) up-to-the minute corrections.
> > 
> > So, the portage snapshot and handbook don't have to on the
> > Live CD.
> 
> No, but it's a lot easier if they are when doing a networkless install.

I think that's what the whole discussion here is about. Should Gentoo
become an elite meta-distro or do we actually want 'less then ultimate
geek' people using it. A lot of the very verbal people over here seem to
want the former. 

I agree that Gentoo shouldn't become an Ubuntu like distro, but the
minimal install cd is, at least for me, a requirement.

If there's too much work for the current devs then they should do
something about it. After the whole p.g.o mess a lot of people,
including myself, offered to become a dev. But I'm still awaiting
replies from 3-4 herds.

The whole discussion going on over here has a much deeper cause, lack of
leadership. Every dev does what seems best for him or his herd, but the
bigger whole seems to be lacking a lot. And I'm affraid that untill
deeper problems are solved, Gentoo will keep losing users and more
important, keep losing credability.

Regards,

Ken

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Pongracz Istvan]

2008. 01. 13, vasárnap keltezéssel 17.46-kor Ken Gypen ezt írta:
........
> I agree that Gentoo shouldn't become an Ubuntu like distro, but the
> minimal install cd is, at least for me, a requirement.
> 
...........
> Regards,
> 
> Ken
> 

After reading lot of posts regarding install cd, I decided, I will
create livecd for install purposes, with:
- handbook 
- fresh stage3 for i686
- portage snapshot

I will try to keep it up-to-date.

Anyway, I'm not a dev member, just a user with motivation to do this.
Are anybody interesting in this kind of release?

Cheers, István


-- 
eGroupWare, gLiveCD, gentoo és barátai
http://www.osbusiness.hu
„A humor a méltóság támasza, fölényünket hirdeti 
mindazzal szemben, amit a sors ránk mér.” 
(Romain Gary)

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 13, 2008 7:03 PM, Pongracz Istvan <pongracz.istvan@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008. 01. 13, vasárnap keltezéssel 17.46-kor Ken Gypen ezt írta:
> ........
> > I agree that Gentoo shouldn't become an Ubuntu like distro, but the
> > minimal install cd is, at least for me, a requirement.
> >
> ...........
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ken
> >
>
> After reading lot of posts regarding install cd, I decided, I will
> create livecd for install purposes, with:
> - handbook
> - fresh stage3 for i686
> - portage snapshot
>
> I will try to keep it up-to-date.
>
> Anyway, I'm not a dev member, just a user with motivation to do this.
> Are anybody interesting in this kind of release?
>
> Cheers, István

I can't help you immediately, but be sure I am going to help you if
you'll still need it in a few months. For me, the key is to keep the
handbook up-to-date. IMHO, it is a must. Having a "2. Choosing the
Right Installation Medium" section not able to provide good
information for new users is really painful. Gentoo is known as "one
of the best documented distro" and I am sure that it is a crucial
point to mind.

Gal'

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Pongracz Istvan]

2008. 01. 13, vasárnap keltezéssel 19.22-kor Galevsky ezt írta:

> I can't help you immediately, but be sure I am going to help you if
> you'll still need it in a few months. For me, the key is to keep the
> handbook up-to-date. IMHO, it is a must. Having a "2. Choosing the
> Right Installation Medium" section not able to provide good
> information for new users is really painful. Gentoo is known as "one
> of the best documented distro" and I am sure that it is a crucial
> point to mind.
> 
> Gal'
> ��?zb z{hx%

Thank you for your help.

I will prepare a "project" page on my website and I try to create the
first release in some weeks. Probably less, than one, depends on my free
time.

I will send a mail to this list to inform you about the progress :)

Regards,
István

-- 
eGroupWare, gLiveCD, gentoo és barátai
http://www.osbusiness.hu
„A humor a méltóság támasza, fölényünket hirdeti 
mindazzal szemben, amit a sors ránk mér.” 
(Romain Gary)

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 13, 2008 8:03 PM, Pongracz Istvan <pongracz.istvan@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will prepare a "project" page on my website and I try to create the
> first release in some weeks. Probably less, than one, depends on my free
> time.
>
> I will send a mail to this list to inform you about the progress :)

Sounds good  :)

But as a very-soon action to undertake, I think that the official
handbook on gentoo.org should be modified as follow:

-add an important note on top of step 2 saying that the current
minimal/live CDs of Gentoo are outdated and people requiring lastest
kernel should use another liveCD (GRML/knoppix or others) then
download the stage3 tarball to keep on the installation.

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Mark Knecht]

On Jan 13, 2008 10:03 AM, Pongracz Istvan <pongracz.istvan@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008. 01. 13, vasárnap keltezéssel 17.46-kor Ken Gypen ezt írta:
> ........
> > I agree that Gentoo shouldn't become an Ubuntu like distro, but the
> > minimal install cd is, at least for me, a requirement.
> >
> ...........
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ken
> >
>
> After reading lot of posts regarding install cd, I decided, I will
> create livecd for install purposes, with:
> - handbook
> - fresh stage3 for i686
> - portage snapshot
>
> I will try to keep it up-to-date.
>
> Anyway, I'm not a dev member, just a user with motivation to do this.
> Are anybody interesting in this kind of release?
>
> Cheers, István
>

Hi,
   As a stupid user type, but one who does care about Gentoo and would
like Gentoo to be strong and healthy, I'd certainly be interested in a
very minimal install CD. I think it's good marketing that someone who
wishes to use Gentoo can download something that writes Gentoo on his
screen while he does the installation.

   All I personally want out of an install CD is something that:

1) Boots new hardware well enough to do the install. The current
LiveCD doesn't boot a P5E motherboard so I couldn't do the install on
that machine using it.

2) Has networking turned on for whatever my NIC is and makes it easy
to start sshd.

   At that point I'll sit on another machine and copy/paste install
commands to do a Stage 3 install.

   I wouldn't use a tarball on this CD. I'd go to the net to get the
latest and greatest. It just needs a good kernel and networking
support. After that it's up to me.

   This install CD, should you do it and I hope you do, should be
focused at supporting new motherboards as soon as possible to ensure I
can always install Gentoo on the newest machines. As far as I'm
concerned, and this is just me the dumb user type, it doesn't need X,
frame buffers, sound or *anything* fancy. Just boot to a text console
and let me do my work. That would be perfect.

   Thanks for listening.

Cheers,
Mark
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 609 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:15:38 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> 1) Boots new hardware well enough to do the install. The current
> LiveCD doesn't boot a P5E motherboard so I couldn't do the install on
> that machine using it.

It booted on mine, I installed from a 2007.0 install disc.

> 2) Has networking turned on for whatever my NIC is and makes it easy
> to start sshd.

But it didn't do networking, so /i did a networkless install and updated
the kernel to a later one that did support my NIC.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Windows '96 artificial intelligence: Unable to FORMAT A: Having a go at C:

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Mark Knecht]

On Jan 13, 2008 11:26 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:15:38 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
> > 1) Boots new hardware well enough to do the install. The current
> > LiveCD doesn't boot a P5E motherboard so I couldn't do the install on
> > that machine using it.
>
> It booted on mine, I installed from a 2007.0 install disc.

I stand partially corrected. It does boot AND see the disk drives *if*
I make changes in BIOS to use AHCI instead of IDE emulation. Since
BIOS was not set that way by ASUS as default the CD does boot but
doesn't see the drives and cannot do the install.

Presumably some sort of driver could have been enabled on the CD that
would not have required this change to BIOS and IMO been more user
install friendly.

>
> > 2) Has networking turned on for whatever my NIC is and makes it easy
> > to start sshd.
>
> But it didn't do networking, so /i did a networkless install and updated
> the kernel to a later one that did support my NIC.

Precisely my point about the kernel and tarball on the CD. The most
user friendly, which then IMO shines the most favorable light on
Gentoo and it's install, is to have a very timely update to the
install CD that has every driver possible on it, be they stable or
testing, so that the machine can get to the network without having to
get drivers there on some other CD, etc. If that means that the
install CD kernel is updated weekly or even daily then so much the
better IMO for the install CD only.

I think you and I are really in violent agreement here Neil. It can be
done, and the easier it is done the better it makes Gentoo look.

Thanks for pointing out the mistake in my comment.

Cheer,
Mark

>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick
>
> Windows '96 artificial intelligence: Unable to FORMAT A: Having a go at C:
>
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

Pongracz Istvan ha scritto:
> 2008. 01. 13, vasárnap keltezéssel 17.46-kor Ken Gypen ezt írta:
> ........
>> I agree that Gentoo shouldn't become an Ubuntu like distro, but the
>> minimal install cd is, at least for me, a requirement.
>>
> ...........
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ken
>>
> 
> After reading lot of posts regarding install cd, I decided, I will
> create livecd for install purposes, with:
> - handbook 
> - fresh stage3 for i686
> - portage snapshot
> 
> I will try to keep it up-to-date.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not a dev member, just a user with motivation to do this.
> Are anybody interesting in this kind of release?

If I can give you an advice: don't create a "new" livecd from scratch.
Take an Ubuntu, Knoppix or similar live cd, just add these three files
in a /gentoo directory, and re-release it xerox, with just the three
files added and a Gentoo logo somewhere.

This is what open source is for: stand on the shoulders of giants. Don't
reinvent the wheel. Ubuntu and Knoppix are extremly widely used and well
tested live cds, designed to support an impressive range of hardware.

You don't want to enter the realm of unknown or scratching your head
thinking about what obsolete ISA card you want to support. Use ready
made live cds. They're shiny gifts of the OSS community, just like
Gentoo is.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Pongracz Istvan]

2008. 01. 14, hétfő keltezéssel 01.27-kor b.n. ezt írta:

> If I can give you an advice: don't create a "new" livecd from scratch.
> Take an Ubuntu, Knoppix or similar live cd, just add these three files
> in a /gentoo directory, and re-release it xerox, with just the three
> files added and a Gentoo logo somewhere
> .......
> 
> m.

Hi,

Thank you for your advice, but in this case, where is the fun part? :)

I do not want to create it from scratch, that is why catalyst exists.
The rest depends on the computer which compiles everything.

I agree, every kind of livecd is ready for install gentoo to a computer.
I already made some livecds for my own, so, it is fun (more or less :)

But I will explain the situation in my site later, based on this thread.
Anyway, this is a "good marketing" to show, how smart I am :)
Ok, I know, I'm stupid, but nobody else ;) Shhhhh, this is a secret :)

Anyway, if somebody needs a fresh gentoo  livecd (for psychological
reason) it will be possible to get one.
With a BIG FAT note, this is not official from gentoo-dev and in fact,
this is not necessary to install gentoo etc.

Cheers,
István
-- 
eGroupWare, gLiveCD, gentoo és barátai
http://www.osbusiness.hu
„A humor a méltóság támasza, fölényünket hirdeti 
mindazzal szemben, amit a sors ránk mér.” 
(Romain Gary)

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 609 bytes --]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:27:30 +0100, b.n. wrote:

> If I can give you an advice: don't create a "new" livecd from scratch.
> Take an Ubuntu, Knoppix or similar live cd, just add these three files
> in a /gentoo directory, and re-release it xerox, with just the three
> files added and a Gentoo logo somewhere.

Or simply rebuild the existing CD with a newer kernel. Almost all of the
complaints about it being out of date can be traced back to the users'
hardware not being supported in the kernel used a year ago.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I locked my coathanger in my car; good thing I had a key.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Cocoy Dayao]

On Jan 14, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:27:30 +0100, b.n. wrote:
>
>> If I can give you an advice: don't create a "new" livecd from  
>> scratch.
>> Take an Ubuntu, Knoppix or similar live cd, just add these three  
>> files
>> in a /gentoo directory, and re-release it xerox, with just the three
>> files added and a Gentoo logo somewhere.
>
> Or simply rebuild the existing CD with a newer kernel. Almost all of  
> the
> complaints about it being out of date can be traced back to the users'
> hardware not being supported in the kernel used a year ago.
>
>

yeah. i agree.
In fact, imho the most perfect gentoo installer is the mini live cd!  
what more can anybody need?
would it take much effort to maintain/refresh a mini live cd installer?
Couldn't that be refreshed every couple of months?
Having an "installer" gets newbies to like gentoo, reduces the barrier  
of entry and gets new blood for the community and introduces users to  
a whole new world and still give newbies the general idea of what  
gentoo is.
not to mention give old hats a quick way to just get gentoo up and  
running as quickly as possible.
if newbies find the mini live cd too difficult, then gentoo is  
probably not for them is it?
Anything greater than a mini install cd i think, the community has the  
right to expect contributors to help develop.

just my two cents worth.
------------------
Cocoy
"People who are really serious about software should make their own  
hardware." --Alan Kay

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 14, 2008 10:39 AM, Cocoy Dayao <cocoy.dayao@gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah. i agree.
> In fact, imho the most perfect gentoo installer is the mini live cd!
> what more can anybody need?
> would it take much effort to maintain/refresh a mini live cd installer?
> Couldn't that be refreshed every couple of months?
> Having an "installer" gets newbies to like gentoo, reduces the barrier
> of entry and gets new blood for the community and introduces users to
> a whole new world and still give newbies the general idea of what
> gentoo is.
> not to mention give old hats a quick way to just get gentoo up and
> running as quickly as possible.
> if newbies find the mini live cd too difficult, then gentoo is
> probably not for them is it?
> Anything greater than a mini install cd i think, the community has the
> right to expect contributors to help develop.
>
> just my two cents worth.

Agreed. IMHO, the noob should start with the handbook on his legs and
the minimal CD.... this is the best way to start for a beginner.

But liveCD are also interesting for networkless people... gimme one
reason not to provide good liveCD to these people that will re-build
-with custom USE flags- the embedded packages ? I can't find....


Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Galevsky]

On Jan 14, 2008 10:17 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:27:30 +0100, b.n. wrote:
>
> > If I can give you an advice: don't create a "new" livecd from scratch.
> > Take an Ubuntu, Knoppix or similar live cd, just add these three files
> > in a /gentoo directory, and re-release it xerox, with just the three
> > files added and a Gentoo logo somewhere.
>
> Or simply rebuild the existing CD with a newer kernel. Almost all of the
> complaints about it being out of date can be traced back to the users'
> hardware not being supported in the kernel used a year ago.

+1, at least for the minimal CD ;)
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[Thufir]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:03:10 +0100, Pongracz Istvan wrote:


> After reading lot of posts regarding install cd, I decided, I will
> create livecd for install purposes, with: - handbook
> - fresh stage3 for i686
> - portage snapshot
> 
> I will try to keep it up-to-date.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not a dev member, just a user with motivation to do this.
> Are anybody interesting in this kind of release?
> 
> Cheers, István


Yes; just with that I had more to offer to the effort.



-Thufir

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

[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Michael Schmarck]

· Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 15:53:48 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:
> 
>> > You also need the handbook, a portage snapshot and a stage tarball.
>> > How many live CDs provide these?  
>> 
>> None. But the portage snapshot is best fetched from the web 
>> anyway, as far as I'm concerned. Same with the handbook, as
>> it may contain (theoritcal) up-to-the minute corrections.
>> 
>> So, the portage snapshot and handbook don't have to on the
>> Live CD.
> 
> No, but it's a lot easier if they are when doing a networkless install.

This cannot be done, as the install CD has to be fetched over
network anyway. At that time, the portage snapshot and handbook
can be downloaded as well.

Michael Schmarck
-- 
Mal: "Kaylee's been missing you something fierce."


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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Is GWN dead?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 378 bytes --]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:20:04 +0100, Michael Schmarck wrote:

> This cannot be done, as the install CD has to be fetched over
> network anyway. At that time, the portage snapshot and handbook
> can be downloaded as well.

I've already covered that in a previous reply to you.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Is it true that cannibals don't eat clowns because they taste funny?

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