[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
On Friday 18 January 2008, Thufir wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:00:51 +, 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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?
On Thursday 17 January 2008, Thufir wrote: On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:33:32 +, 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
Thufir [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
Thufir wrote: On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:17:11 +, 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] Re: Is GWN dead?
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 17 January 2008, Thufir wrote: On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:33:32 +, 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:19:48 + (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. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:27:03 + (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! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:00:51 +, 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] Re: Is GWN dead?
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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:33:32 +, 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:17:11 +, 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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?
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?
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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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?
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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 waay 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?
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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
· James [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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?
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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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 packagingworkstation 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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 waay 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?
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?
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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?
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. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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.? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:59:52 + (UTC) James [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
· Galevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Jan 11, 2008 8:08 PM, Michael Schmarck [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: Is GWN dead?
· James [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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 packagingworkstation 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?
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
-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?
On Jan 12, 2008 12:52 PM, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
Daniel Pielmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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?
On Jan 11, 2008 11:02 AM, Michael Schmarck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
David Relson wrote: On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:02:08 +0100 Michael Schmarck wrote: Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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?
On Jan 11, 2008 2:25 PM, Eddie Mihalow Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:09:04 +0100
Galevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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¢à¨¥x%Ë
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
Galevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 11, 2008 10:38 AM, Dirk Heinrichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:02:08 +0100 Michael Schmarck wrote: Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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?
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
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?
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?
Michael Schmarck schrieb: · Norman Rieß [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
· Norman Rieß [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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?
Galevsky wrote: On Jan 11, 2008 2:25 PM, Eddie Mihalow Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:15:49 -0500 David Relson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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-
[gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?
· Daniel da Veiga [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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?
-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?
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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 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 ATT 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
