Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On 4/19/07, Jerry McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Chris Would you take the time and post what motherboard the Supermicro is plugged into and whether you are running 32bit or 64bit Gentoo? Thank you, in advance. -- Jerry McBride -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list Sure thing. :) Mobo: Asus P4S800-MX 1x Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 (replaced 2x Promise SATA300TX4) 1x Promise SATA300TX4 The Supermicro is hooked into just a normal PCI slot, not PCI-X. I'm sure there is a performance hit but I can't notice it if there is. The 8 drives hooked to it are hooked via 2 multilane cables to an external enclosure. The Promise is driving 4 drives in the server itself. This is the cable kit I bought 2 of: http://www.cooldrives.com/multilane-adapter-kit.html Gentoo is installed on a small 20g drive (hda). I'm running a 32bit Gentoo. I upgraded from 2.6.17-r8 to 2.6.19-r5. The reason was .19 had the Marvel SATA driver in it. mv_sata or sata_mv, I can't remember offhand the right way to type it. I just compiled (with genkernel) the Marvel driver into the kernel, and booted up the box with the Supermicro installed and my Raid5 array on those 8 disks was back up with no issue. I originally built the server with the 3 Promise cards in there. when I found out about the Supermicro card, I looked in my config for .17 and did off hand see a Marvel driver but it was in the .19 one so I upgraded. This frees up a PCI slot so I can put in a gigabit nic since the built on nic is only 10/100. :) I know of others that are running uber raid servers with multiple of those Supermicro cards installed in a system. I know of at least 1 person on some boards I peruse that is running with 30 drives w/ 4 of them in a box. But I don't think he's running Gentoo. :( Promise as a PCI-X card as well but it won't work in a normal PCI slot like the Supermicro one will. Plus the Promise card is more expensive. # lspci snip 00:09.0 Mass storage controller: Promise Technology, Inc. PDC40718 (SATA 300 TX4) (rev 02) 00:0a.0 SCSI storage controller: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. MV88SX6081 8-port SATA II PCI-X Controller (rev 09) Hope this helps. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Thursday 19 April 2007 12:55:57 am chris wrote: On 4/18/07, Drew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who'd have thought a Promise SATA300 TX4 would be unsupported in 2006.1? I'm running 2006.1 and my Promise SATA300TX4 worked fine on a new install. The kernel I started on was: 2.6.17-r8. I never changed anything in my BIOS or on teh controller itself. Just worked (tm). :) I just chose the Promise modules for SATA to install into the kernel (not as a module). I had 3 of them in my system running 12 drives till I switched 2 out for a 8 port card (Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8). Hey Chris Would you take the time and post what motherboard the Supermicro is plugged into and whether you are running 32bit or 64bit Gentoo? Thank you, in advance. -- Jerry McBride -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:11:21 +0400, Neil Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: I do not see how it is hard to create a minimal installation CD image every time new hardware support is added into the kernel, or new gcc version goes stable, or new portage version goes stable. How is any of that relevant to the minimal install CD? GGC, Portage, etc. come from the stage tarball you install. All the install CD does is boot the system - you can use any livecd for that. What is really needed, is updated stages. Exactly. I linked GCC and Portage to the minimal CD because all the docs and the numbering scheme itself link the stages file with the minimal CD image. If the minimal CD is gentoo/releases/x86/2006.1/installcd/install-x86-minimal-2006.1.iso, then the stage is gentoo/releases/x86/2006.1/stages/stage3-i686-2006.1.tar.bz2. I cannot tell if it is easier to brake this 1 to 1 relationship and modify the docs or to just rename the CD image to the new version if there are no changes to it. I agree that any livecd can be used to boot the system (I used Knoppix). Thus it is possible to change the minimal CD numbering radically, for example, base it on the kernel number since it normally increases as new hardware support is added to Linux. The CD will be install-x86-minimal-2.6.21-rc6.iso, and the stages will be numbered and updated independently. I do not know if this will cause problems with the live CD or not. -- Andrei Gerasimenko -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Once again, there should be some problem with my English. It is official Gentoo release policy to have minimal, live, and platform releases in sync. Posting a new image to forums is not that tightly related to policies. No it's not, and I never suggested it was. As an Open Source project, ANYONE can build a new, unofficial image that supports brand new hardware. They don't need to wait for the full releng cycle of testing on all packages. Perhaps. But as I discovered late last year, being able to build an image that supports your hardware is kinda impossible when you can't even install Gentoo onto it in the first place using the images available. Who'd have thought a Promise SATA300 TX4 would be unsupported in 2006.1? -Drew -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Hi, On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 02:41:34 -0700 Drew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who'd have thought a Promise SATA300 TX4 would be unsupported in 2006.1? In all honesty, it's probably not absolutely unsupported. Switch your SATA controller to compatibility mode in BIOS, don't care for DMA, and it will probably happily work. I never checked this, though, since I've never installed Gentoo using a Gentoo boot CD. -hwh -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:26:20 +0400, Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: It looks like everybody, me too, agrees that it is a very good reason to switch to semi-annual releases, but please note that the very fact that quarterly releases were started is a proof that they are desirable. All it proves is that releng thought it was a good idea at the time, until they tried to achieve it :( -- Neil Bothwick If at first you don't succeed, you'll get a lot of free advice from folks who didn't succeed either. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Hi, On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:52:42 +0100 Hamie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 15 April 2007 07:37, Dale wrote: Norberto Bensa wrote: Daniel da Veiga wrote: On 4/15/07, Norberto Bensa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. 2006.1 doesn't boot on my hardware. ... We (I) need 2007.0 ASAP. Just get any old version (that works), That's the point. None works. The media needs kernel 2.6.18 or better. I can use Knoppix or Ubuntu, but that's not the point. Maybe some are not understanding the point he is making. If I understand correctly, he needs a newer release so that when he boots the CD to do a install, it will see his hardware. It would appear that the The same thing happens on my laptop as well (Thinkpad Z61m, core2Duo). The Gentoo boot disks just don't have the drivers. I had to boot a Knoppix disk, install that, then do gentoo as a chroot... Which was a REAL nightmare because the knoppix was 32bit I wanted a 64-bit install (It took messing around with a kernel from a ~amd64 desktop manually copied over as well before I could get gentoo installed correctly). H Don't want to seem i recommend it, but you can try the Sabayon-miniCD for a new install. Don't know how actual the kernel/userspace are but in all cases newer then 2006.1. It's a Gentoo-based (slightly modified) distro. A good thing is it updates it's install-CDs quite often. HTH. Rumen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 08:41, Rumen Yotov wrote: Hi, [deleted] H Don't want to seem i recommend it, but you can try the Sabayon-miniCD for a new install. Don't know how actual the kernel/userspace are but in all cases newer then 2006.1. It's a Gentoo-based (slightly modified) distro. A good thing is it updates it's install-CDs quite often. Hey thanks I'd never heard of it I'll give it a go regards Hamish pgpCLHstvY47n.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:50:23 +0400, Dale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: I agree that the installation CD does not need to be specifically a Gentoo cd, but I believe that it should be always possible to use it for installation, even when workarounds are available. The only argument that explains why it is currently not the fact is the inability to sustain quarterly release schedule. It looks like everybody, me too, agrees that it is a very good reason to switch to semi-annual releases, but please note that the very fact that quarterly releases were started is a proof that they are desirable. I guess the problem here is that the Gentoo Minimal Installation CD release is linked to the Gentoo Installer LiveCD release and to the Gentoo Reference Platform release. If the minimal CD is released quarterly or, better, whenever new hardware hits the shelves, the experience of new Gentoo users will be better. --Andrei Gerasimenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list Even though I would like to see semi-annual releases, I can also understand the effort that has to go into making it happen. You would have to catch everything just right to make it worthwhile. Example, it is time for a new release and gcc is almost ready to be marked stable. Do you do the release anyway or wait until gcc is stable? What if it is not as stable as people think and it is already released before that is found out? That would not be good for Gentoo either. Add in that some new piece of hardware is coming out and the drivers are being worked on but not yet finished. Then what? What if the packages such as gcc, KDE, Gnome and other important ones and the newer hardware drivers never sync up exactly right? Who would decide what is more important, hardware drivers or packages? I can see this from both sides. Having a reasonably up to date install CD would be nice but it would take some effort and planning to get it there. I suspect the new Proctors would be all over Gentoo-dev. LOL That could turn into a really long discussion and it would never end really. By the time one is released it would be time to start planning the next and may even overlap a lot too. I'm glad I'm a lowly user and not a dev. :-) Dale Sorry for the long quote, it all looks equally relevant (or irrelevant). There should be some problem with my English. I understand and agree with your arguments and even, I hope, have explained that in the original post. However, they are valid for the Gentoo Installer LiveCD and the Reference Platform only. The Gentoo Minimal Installation CD has much less packages and it is much easier to update it. I do not see how it is hard to create a minimal installation CD image every time new hardware support is added into the kernel, or new gcc version goes stable, or new portage version goes stable. Whether this is desirable or quarterly releases are sufficient is another question, since too many versions may confuse new users. The problem is that currently the minimal CD, the Live CD, and the Reference Platform are released simultaneously. I guess the minimal CD should be numbered like 2006.1, 2006.1.u1, 2006.1.u2, 2007.0.p1, 2007.0.p2, 2007.0, 2007.0.u1 and so on and released as necessary between full releases. I feel it is harder to fix the relevant Handbook and web site entries and, possibly, ensure that it gets to all the mirrors than to prepare the new CD image. -- Andrei Gerasimenko -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:26:23 +0400, Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: I do not see how it is hard to create a minimal installation CD image every time new hardware support is added into the kernel, Then do it. Open source gives you the opportunity to make things happen yourself instead of whining that others won't do it. The build tools are in portage, so there's nothing stopping anyone from producing an updated minimal install CD, as has already been posted to the forums. or new gcc version goes stable, or new portage version goes stable. These are irrelevant. As long as the CD boots, recognises your core hardware - which really comes down to disk controllers and network interfaces - and installs a working system, the rest can be updated post-install. A major GCC update is the exception to this rule, but that is precisely the sort of thing that needs extensive testing on a range of platforms rather than a rushed release. -- Neil Bothwick Honk if you love peace and quiet. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Neil Bothwick wrote: A major GCC update is the exception to this rule, but that is precisely the sort of thing that needs extensive testing on a range of platforms rather than a rushed release. That was what I was referring too. It would be time consuming to install then turn right around and have to upgrade gcc and do a emerge -e world etc etc etc. Again, I see that this can be a difficult thing to balance and it would not be easy to keep it balanced. Dale :-) :-) :-) -- www.myspace.com/-remove-me-dalek1967 Copy n paste then remove the -remove-me- part. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:33:18 -0500, Dale wrote: A major GCC update is the exception to this rule, but that is precisely the sort of thing that needs extensive testing on a range of platforms rather than a rushed release. That was what I was referring too. It would be time consuming to install then turn right around and have to upgrade gcc and do a emerge -e world etc etc etc. The time taken is irrelevant, because the computer is still usable while the emerge is running in the background. The important point is that everything builds with the new GCC on all supported platforms. That's the sort of thing that takes the time. -- Neil Bothwick Not one shred of evidence supports the notion that life is serious. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:30:14 +0400, Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: I do not see how it is hard to create a minimal installation CD image every time new hardware support is added into the kernel, Then do it. Open source gives you the opportunity to make things happen yourself instead of whining that others won't do it. The build tools are in portage, so there's nothing stopping anyone from producing an updated minimal install CD, as has already been posted to the forums. Sorry, where do you see whining? Sorry, that came across as rather harsh. It was intended as a general comment, not a criticism of you. Even if I say that if whatever posted to forums is good then it should go to the official Gentoo site, this would not be whining. No, but it would not be practical either, because an official release needs a lot more testing. Once again, there should be some problem with my English. It is official Gentoo release policy to have minimal, live, and platform releases in sync. Posting a new image to forums is not that tightly related to policies. No it's not, and I never suggested it was. As an Open Source project, ANYONE can build a new, unofficial image that supports brand new hardware. They don't need to wait for the full releng cycle of testing on all packages. This very thread, as explained in my post, is just one reason to change the policy. Then you should file a bug suggesting this. or new gcc version goes stable, or new portage version goes stable. These are irrelevant. As long as the CD boots, recognises your core hardware - which really comes down to disk controllers and network interfaces - and installs a working system, the rest can be updated post-install. No, GCC and portage are relevant. The fact that the installation process succeeds does not help much when a new user, just after downloading the latest and greatest, has to recompile something as basic and huge as GCC or just interrupt the install getting the scary message you better do nothing until you upgrade Portage. Whatever is included, something big will have a new version by the time the full install has been comprehensively tested on all supported platforms and put on the mirrors for a week. A Gentoo install is supposed to give you a working system that is a starting point, not an end in itself. The only time a new install disc is really necessary is when the old one doesn't support your hardware. A major GCC update is the exception to this rule, but that is precisely the sort of thing that needs extensive testing on a range of platforms rather than a rushed release. Just in case you already deleted my post, I recommend new minimal CD release each time a new GCC version, major or not, goes stable. I still maintain that minor GCC upgrades are not an issue, kernel upgrades are far more relevant as that is where most hardware support takes place. Why do you consider a GCC upgrade such a big deal? After a Stage 3 install, you are likely to want to do an emerge -e world anyway, to apply your customisations, so GCC will probably be recompiled anyway. As long as the latest stable version is not incompatible with the CD, what's the big deal? What extra testing does a stable version need? To ensure that everything works as a cohesive whole. -- Neil Bothwick If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:08:49 +0400, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:26:23 +0400, Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: I do not see how it is hard to create a minimal installation CD image every time new hardware support is added into the kernel, Then do it. Open source gives you the opportunity to make things happen yourself instead of whining that others won't do it. The build tools are in portage, so there's nothing stopping anyone from producing an updated minimal install CD, as has already been posted to the forums. Sorry, where do you see whining? Even if I say that if whatever posted to forums is good then it should go to the official Gentoo site, this would not be whining. Once again, there should be some problem with my English. It is official Gentoo release policy to have minimal, live, and platform releases in sync. Posting a new image to forums is not that tightly related to policies. This very thread, as explained in my post, is just one reason to change the policy. I agree that if I become a Gentoo developer and use developer mailing lists then the chances for the change are better. or new gcc version goes stable, or new portage version goes stable. These are irrelevant. As long as the CD boots, recognises your core hardware - which really comes down to disk controllers and network interfaces - and installs a working system, the rest can be updated post-install. No, GCC and portage are relevant. The fact that the installation process succeeds does not help much when a new user, just after downloading the latest and greatest, has to recompile something as basic and huge as GCC or just interrupt the install getting the scary message you better do nothing until you upgrade Portage. A major GCC update is the exception to this rule, but that is precisely the sort of thing that needs extensive testing on a range of platforms rather than a rushed release. Just in case you already deleted my post, I recommend new minimal CD release each time a new GCC version, major or not, goes stable. What extra testing does a stable version need? -- Andrei Gerasimenko -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Hamie wrote: Hey thanks I'd never heard of it I'll give it a go If you want to install Sabayon and stay with it without ever updating anything until the next Sabayon release, fine - but don't ever think that Sabayon is a quick and easy way to a working Gentoo system, it most certainly isn't. A simple emerge -uavD world will fail without hours of work. Be lucky, Neil -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Neil Walker wrote: Be lucky, Neil This is completely offtopic. But Be lucky made me think of the movie Demolition man, is this where you got it? In that case, the reply to that line was amusing :P /offtopic -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: I do not see how it is hard to create a minimal installation CD image every time new hardware support is added into the kernel, or new gcc version goes stable, or new portage version goes stable. How is any of that relevant to the minimal install CD? GGC, Portage, etc. come from the stage tarball you install. All the install CD does is boot the system - you can use any livecd for that. What is really needed, is updated stages. Be lucky, Neil -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
fire-eyes wrote: Neil Walker wrote: Be lucky, Neil This is completely offtopic. But Be lucky made me think of the movie Demolition man, is this where you got it? In that case, the reply to that line was amusing :P /offtopic I've been using it since the early days of Fidonet. I don't think Demolition Man was around then. ;) Be lucky, Neil -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 11:08 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote: ... These are irrelevant. As long as the CD boots, recognises your core hardware - which really comes down to disk controllers and network interfaces - and installs a working system, the rest can be updated post-install. Unfortunately, 2006.1 wont even boot with increasing amounts of hardware - and increasingly other distros LiveCD's do. My last one was a catch 22 - earlier LiveCD's would boot, but no drivers for the network card, and therefore no easy way to install. (no floppy etc access as well :( 2006.1 doesnt fully boot as it loses the cdrom partway through the boot process. I ended up using the soon to be superseeded (if it isnt already) FC6 livecd - a pain. BillK -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Mon, April 16, 2007 11:48 pm, Alan McKinnon wrote: To install gentoo, the minimum you require is a running kernel, a network connection and a shell session. From there you chroot into the directory that is going to become your /, unpack a portage tree and binaries copies of some important apps, then emerge the rest. You don't have to use a gentoo CD for that, I've done it from a Red Hat rescue disk, a Knoppix disk and from a working Mandrake install. The gentoo CD does make life easier though if you run into trouble, as everything you will need will be on the disk and you don't have to hunt for stuff. You do need a working chroot, which can be a problem on some rescue floppies (if you are reduced to floppies). -- Nick Rout -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Sunday 15 April 2007 15:31, Jarry wrote: I had the similar experience: tried to install 2006.1 on new mobo, but sata controller could not be recognised (some via chpiset iirc). Ditto Had to buy extra some p-ata drive, install gentoo on it, update kernel, then sata-drive got recognised, chroot to new sata-drive, and finally install gentoo on it once again. Tedious work... As someone already pointed out, boot using any other livecd that recognises the controller, then follow the usual gentoo install instructions, remembering to config kernel for your sata controller. I had to do this to an Asus motherboard a little while back - yes it was frustrating at the time because initially I had no idea why my controller wasn't recognised. -- Crayon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Crayon wrote: As someone already pointed out, boot using any other livecd that recognises the controller, then follow the usual gentoo install instructions, remembering to config kernel for your sata controller. I had to do this to an Asus motherboard a little while back - yes it was frustrating at the time because initially I had no idea why my controller wasn't recognised. But if your system has only one CD and not enough memory to load in cache, you're in a pickle. They need to strike a balance somewhere. Problem is, they come out with new hardware so fast nowadays. It's hard for anybody to keep up to date completely. I suspect Gentoo does better than most as far as a distro is concerned, not counting CD based things like Knoppix or something. Dale :-) :-) :-) -- www.myspace.com/-remove-me-dalek1967 Copy n paste then remove the -remove-me- part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Monday 16 April 2007 16:05, Dale wrote: But if your system has only one CD and not enough memory to load in cache, you're in a pickle. I'm not sure why that would be a problem? My system only had one cdrom and I managed fine :) -- Crayon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Em Segunda 16 Abril 2007 05:19, Crayon escreveu: On Monday 16 April 2007 16:05, Dale wrote: But if your system has only one CD and not enough memory to load in cache, you're in a pickle. I'm not sure why that would be a problem? My system only had one cdrom and I managed fine :) I don't known how to do it... u.u So... I need to change my distro on a PC upgrade?? =P -- Davi Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Agora com fortune: Excerpt from a conversation between a customer support person and a customer working for a well-known military-affiliated research lab: Support: You're not our only customer, you know. Customer: But we're one of the few with tactical nuclear weapons. pgprGI5uPq48R.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Monday 16 April 2007, Davi wrote: Em Segunda 16 Abril 2007 05:19, Crayon escreveu: On Monday 16 April 2007 16:05, Dale wrote: But if your system has only one CD and not enough memory to load in cache, you're in a pickle. I'm not sure why that would be a problem? My system only had one cdrom and I managed fine :) I don't known how to do it... u.u So... I need to change my distro on a PC upgrade?? =P No, not at all. Yoiu don't use a CD to upgrade gentoo, you just run 'emerge -uND world'. To install gentoo, the minimum you require is a running kernel, a network connection and a shell session. From there you chroot into the directory that is going to become your /, unpack a portage tree and binaries copies of some important apps, then emerge the rest. You don't have to use a gentoo CD for that, I've done it from a Red Hat rescue disk, a Knoppix disk and from a working Mandrake install. The gentoo CD does make life easier though if you run into trouble, as everything you will need will be on the disk and you don't have to hunt for stuff. What Dale was saying is that if your machine doesn't have enough memory to run a Gentoo LiveCD or installer, then you have a problem because you can't get the first of the things you must have - a running kernel. But it's been something like 10 years now since I last saw a regular machine that had so little RAm... alan -- Optimists say the glass is half full, Pessimists say the glass is half empty, Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Sunday 15 April 2007 07:37, Dale wrote: Norberto Bensa wrote: Daniel da Veiga wrote: On 4/15/07, Norberto Bensa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. 2006.1 doesn't boot on my hardware. ... We (I) need 2007.0 ASAP. Just get any old version (that works), That's the point. None works. The media needs kernel 2.6.18 or better. I can use Knoppix or Ubuntu, but that's not the point. Maybe some are not understanding the point he is making. If I understand correctly, he needs a newer release so that when he boots the CD to do a install, it will see his hardware. It would appear that the The same thing happens on my laptop as well (Thinkpad Z61m, core2Duo). The Gentoo boot disks just don't have the drivers. I had to boot a Knoppix disk, install that, then do gentoo as a chroot... Which was a REAL nightmare because the knoppix was 32bit I wanted a 64-bit install (It took messing around with a kernel from a ~amd64 desktop manually copied over as well before I could get gentoo installed correctly). I'd hate to have to try rebuild... H pgpMOUuJAUEUj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 02:14:07 -0300 Norberto Bensa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: deface wrote: If you want a new release, just emerge --sync. :) Not true. 2006.1 doesn't boot on my hardware. I needed to bootstrap on an old box, then swap hard drives. Not very friendly. We (I) need 2007.0 ASAP. Regards, Norberto As has been said, the installation CD does not need to be specifically a Gentoo cd, although it seems worth repeating that it _does_ have to support the same architecture. This isn't usually a big deal unless a chip supports multiple architectures, ie x86_64 can run x86 code. But it can't run both at once unless it has the right libs and - gasp - livecd's don't. Some people on the gentoo forums also updated a disk image a little so that they could boot it on their nice new computers. You should be able to find it without too much difficulty on the forums. It's definitely a good thing to have the official releases come out when ready. Buggy discs are a lot worse publicity than being behind schedule. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On 4/16/07, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 02:14:07 -0300 Norberto Bensa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: deface wrote: If you want a new release, just emerge --sync. :) Not true. 2006.1 doesn't boot on my hardware. I needed to bootstrap on an old box, then swap hard drives. Not very friendly. We (I) need 2007.0 ASAP. Regards, Norberto As has been said, the installation CD does not need to be specifically a Gentoo cd, although it seems worth repeating that it _does_ have to support the same architecture. This isn't usually a big deal unless a chip supports multiple architectures, ie x86_64 can run x86 code. But it can't run both at once unless it has the right libs and - gasp - livecd's don't. Some people on the gentoo forums also updated a disk image a little so that they could boot it on their nice new computers. You should be able to find it without too much difficulty on the forums. http://www.kernel-of-truth.net/downloads_kOT.html I used it to get things up and running amd64 with the new JMicron drivers, worked like a charm (ot: in stark contrast to the windows install, which eventually required a *floppy* to load drivers...slackware flashbacks ;) ). If you're worried about compatibility with a new rig, searching the forums for hardware (Asus P5B in my case) often turns up the poor souls who found bugs the hard way, allowing cowards like me to benefit from their hard work. -- Ryan W Sims -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:10:27 +0400, Ryan Sims [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... As has been said, the installation CD does not need to be specifically a Gentoo cd, although it seems worth repeating that it _does_ have to support the same architecture. ... http://www.kernel-of-truth.net/downloads_kOT.html I agree that the installation CD does not need to be specifically a Gentoo cd, but I believe that it should be always possible to use it for installation, even when workarounds are available. The only argument that explains why it is currently not the fact is the inability to sustain quarterly release schedule. It looks like everybody, me too, agrees that it is a very good reason to switch to semi-annual releases, but please note that the very fact that quarterly releases were started is a proof that they are desirable. I guess the problem here is that the Gentoo Minimal Installation CD release is linked to the Gentoo Installer LiveCD release and to the Gentoo Reference Platform release. If the minimal CD is released quarterly or, better, whenever new hardware hits the shelves, the experience of new Gentoo users will be better. -- Andrei Gerasimenko -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: I agree that the installation CD does not need to be specifically a Gentoo cd, but I believe that it should be always possible to use it for installation, even when workarounds are available. The only argument that explains why it is currently not the fact is the inability to sustain quarterly release schedule. It looks like everybody, me too, agrees that it is a very good reason to switch to semi-annual releases, but please note that the very fact that quarterly releases were started is a proof that they are desirable. I guess the problem here is that the Gentoo Minimal Installation CD release is linked to the Gentoo Installer LiveCD release and to the Gentoo Reference Platform release. If the minimal CD is released quarterly or, better, whenever new hardware hits the shelves, the experience of new Gentoo users will be better. --Andrei Gerasimenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list Even though I would like to see semi-annual releases, I can also understand the effort that has to go into making it happen. You would have to catch everything just right to make it worthwhile. Example, it is time for a new release and gcc is almost ready to be marked stable. Do you do the release anyway or wait until gcc is stable? What if it is not as stable as people think and it is already released before that is found out? That would not be good for Gentoo either. Add in that some new piece of hardware is coming out and the drivers are being worked on but not yet finished. Then what? What if the packages such as gcc, KDE, Gnome and other important ones and the newer hardware drivers never sync up exactly right? Who would decide what is more important, hardware drivers or packages? I can see this from both sides. Having a reasonably up to date install CD would be nice but it would take some effort and planning to get it there. I suspect the new Proctors would be all over Gentoo-dev. LOL That could turn into a really long discussion and it would never end really. By the time one is released it would be time to start planning the next and may even overlap a lot too. I'm glad I'm a lowly user and not a dev. :-) Dale :-) :-) :-) -- www.myspace.com/-remove-me-dalek1967 Copy n paste then remove the -remove-me- part. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Norberto Bensa wrote: Daniel da Veiga wrote: On 4/15/07, Norberto Bensa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. 2006.1 doesn't boot on my hardware. ... We (I) need 2007.0 ASAP. Just get any old version (that works), That's the point. None works. The media needs kernel 2.6.18 or better. I can use Knoppix or Ubuntu, but that's not the point. Maybe some are not understanding the point he is making. If I understand correctly, he needs a newer release so that when he boots the CD to do a install, it will see his hardware. It would appear that the 2006 series is not seeing some hardware, whatever that is, and he needs a newer version to get it to see his hardware to do the install. I don't think he is talking about after the install but trying to start the install while booted from the CD. OP, am I getting this right? That's the way I took it anyway. Gosh it is hard to explain in print. No wonder it takes so long to write a book. ;-) Dale :-) :-) :-) -- www.myspace.com/-remove-me-dalek1967 Copy n paste then remove the -remove-me- part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Norberto Bensa wrote: Just get any old version (that works), That's the point. None works. The media needs kernel 2.6.18 or better. I had the similar experience: tried to install 2006.1 on new mobo, but sata controller could not be recognised (some via chpiset iirc). Had to buy extra some p-ata drive, install gentoo on it, update kernel, then sata-drive got recognised, chroot to new sata-drive, and finally install gentoo on it once again. Tedious work... Jarry -- ___ This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists! Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Hello Thomas T. Veldhouse, a) gentoo is not about releases. I understand that. BUT ... it was announced long ago that there was a quarterly release plan starting in 2005. It was followed for only one year? That's right. It was quickly discovered that forcing a quarterly release schedule on releng was impractical, so they switched to bi-annual releases from 2006. 2007.0 was originally scheduled for release in February, but the profile has only just hit the portage tree. The actual release should not be too far off now. Aside from the new hardware situation, there is another reason for release, especially on schedule ones, publicity. Magazines like to include new releases on their cover discs and want to carry reviews of new releases (not betas). I was asked to review 2007.0 three months ago, based on the original release schedule, I'm still waiting to do so. That is lost positive publicity for Gentoo, at a time when it is getting plenty of publicity and precious little of it positive. -- Neil Bothwick Don't put all your hypes in one home page. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
El Sun, 15 Apr 2007 01:37:54 -0500 Dale [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Norberto Bensa wrote: Daniel da Veiga wrote: I can use Knoppix or Ubuntu, but that's not the point. Maybe some are not understanding the point he is making. If I understand correctly, he needs a newer release so that when he boots the CD to do a install, it will see his hardware. It would appear that the 2006 series is not seeing some hardware, whatever that is, and he needs a newer version to get it to see his hardware to do the install. I don't think he is talking about after the install but trying to start the install while booted from the CD. Now I understand it and I think it is a fair point, still, I wouldn't worry at all about that because, even being besides the point, I can use an alternative cd to boot. I am sure that if the 2007.0 releases hasn't happened yet, it is just because there are more important things to work on. --Jesús Guerrero -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Jesús Guerrero wrote: El Sun, 15 Apr 2007 01:37:54 -0500 Dale [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Norberto Bensa wrote: Daniel da Veiga wrote: I can use Knoppix or Ubuntu, but that's not the point. Maybe some are not understanding the point he is making. If I understand correctly, he needs a newer release so that when he boots the CD to do a install, it will see his hardware. It would appear that the 2006 series is not seeing some hardware, whatever that is, and he needs a newer version to get it to see his hardware to do the install. I don't think he is talking about after the install but trying to start the install while booted from the CD. Now I understand it and I think it is a fair point, still, I wouldn't worry at all about that because, even being besides the point, I can use an alternative cd to boot. I am sure that if the 2007.0 releases hasn't happened yet, it is just because there are more important things to work on. --Jesús Guerrero But as someone else just posted, he has two computers, one being a Dell, that will not boot the 2006 CD so it is a really good point. Booting Knopix or something to install Gentoo may not be difficult if you only have one CD drive. So, having a up to date install CD is really a good idea. How are people going to install if they can't get stuff to work so they can? I know they are busy, and of late is not being involved in a flame fest either, but it is something that has to be done nevertheless. I see the point pretty clear, from both sides. I'm sure they don't want to rush a release and have serious problems with it but at the same time, people are coming up with new hardware and people need them to work so they can install Gentoo. Dale :-) :-) :-) -- www.myspace.com/-remove-me-dalek1967 Copy n paste then remove the -remove-me- part.
[gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Forgive me for being naive and maybe asking a question asked before; I have been away from active participation on this list for quite some time. I have done a lot of google searching and can not find any answer to the question of why is Gentoo 2006.1 the latest release? What happened to the quarterly releases? The mailing list is still active, but the lack of a current release seems to indicate that the Gentoo project is no longer truly active. Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
If you want a new release, just emerge --sync. :) On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 20:44 -0500, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: Forgive me for being naive and maybe asking a question asked before; I have been away from active participation on this list for quite some time. I have done a lot of google searching and can not find any answer to the question of why is Gentoo 2006.1 the latest release? What happened to the quarterly releases? The mailing list is still active, but the lack of a current release seems to indicate that the Gentoo project is no longer truly active. Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse
RE: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
-Original Message- If you want a new release, just emerge --sync. :) About a month ago I --sync my systems and the available profile was still 2006.1. Maybe 2007.0 will arrive soon if not there already. On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 20:44 -0500, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: Forgive me for being naive and maybe asking a question asked before; I have been away from active participation on this list for quite some time. I have done a lot of google searching and can not find any answer to the question of why is Gentoo 2006.1 the latest release? What happened to the quarterly releases? The mailing list is still active, but the lack of a current release seems to indicate that the Gentoo project is no longer truly active. Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On Sonntag, 15. April 2007, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: The mailing list is still active, but the lack of a current release seems to indicate that the Gentoo project is no longer truly active. Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse a) gentoo is not about releases. b) the 1.4 release took ages. c) the real indicator of activity is the amount of changes in the portage tree. And surprise! There is the usual high amount of updated, removed or new ebuilds. d) if you want more releases, become a dev and join rel-eng. e) if you look here you'll see that the gentoo-dev ml is as active as always in the last couple of years. http://marc.info/?l=gentoo-devr=1w=2 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
El Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:44:56 -0500 Thomas T. Veldhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Forgive me for being naive and maybe asking a question asked before; I have been away from active participation on this list for quite some time. I have done a lot of google searching and can not find any answer to the question of why is Gentoo 2006.1 the latest release? Yes, this has been discussed in a number of places before here. Try in the forums. What happened to the quarterly releases? The mailing list is still active, but the lack of a current release seems to indicate that the Gentoo project is no longer truly active. You are confused about how gentoo works, it is not based on releases. Just sync and you have all the latest stuff at your disponsal, to use it as you wish. Profiles are nothing important in which regards having an updated distro. They are useful for other purposes, though. For example, different architectures and special functionalities like SELinux. If you sync everyday you will see that there is a lot of activity in portage, and the forums and lists are active as always, bugzilla is alive, the community is alive, and, being this a community project, I think that your claim is totally unfounded, and plain wrong. -- Jesús Guerrero -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: On Sonntag, 15. April 2007, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: The mailing list is still active, but the lack of a current release seems to indicate that the Gentoo project is no longer truly active. Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse a) gentoo is not about releases. I understand that. BUT ... it was announced long ago that there was a quarterly release plan starting in 2005. It was followed for only one year? b) the 1.4 release took ages. Indeed ... and then came the apparently aborted plan to do quarterly releases. c) the real indicator of activity is the amount of changes in the portage tree. And surprise! There is the usual high amount of updated, removed or new ebuilds. Yes, not an indicator of quality or progress, just commits. d) if you want more releases, become a dev and join rel-eng. I don't necessarily want more releases. I DO want to know what happened to the release schedule. e) if you look here you'll see that the gentoo-dev ml is as active as always in the last couple of years. http://marc.info/?l=gentoo-devr=1w=2 Good to hear. Tom Veldhouse
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
deface wrote: If you want a new release, just emerge --sync. :) Not true. 2006.1 doesn't boot on my hardware. I needed to bootstrap on an old box, then swap hard drives. Not very friendly. We (I) need 2007.0 ASAP. Regards, Norberto -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Why is the latest release 2006.1?
On 4/15/07, Norberto Bensa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: deface wrote: If you want a new release, just emerge --sync. :) Not true. 2006.1 doesn't boot on my hardware. I needed to bootstrap on an old box, then swap hard drives. Not very friendly. We (I) need 2007.0 ASAP. Just get any old version (that works), install, and when its all done, upgrade. Simple as that. I used an old 2005 install disc for an emergency installation at a friend the other day. The only thing that bothered me was the GCC upgrade, the rest went smoothly, as all you need is a sync to be able to install the latest software, upgrade all packages, use the latest profile, etc. There's no urgency for a new release, it's really not needed because of the way Gentoo works. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
