Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Mark Knecht wrote: I will admit that I have a big concern about an upcoming MySQL update that is probably going to break my whole TV network here. Due to my fear I haven't upgraded MySQL and will likely come back ranting myself sometime in December when I'm probably forced to do it. We'll see... I have upgraded MySQL on several servers (two in production) without any problems whatsoever... -- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:03:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1 Neil, Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get the equivalent of a Stage 1 install? When installing a stage 3 you are using packages compiled with the default compiler and USE flags. All I did was set them up as I wanted and rebuilt everything with emerge -e world. The specific change I made in this case was changing -mcpu to G4 and adding -fomit-frame-pointer, which may be unnecessary. But that's not relevant, the emerge -e world is. -- Neil Bothwick CONGRSS.SYS corruptd... Re-boot Washington D.C? (Y/N) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:50:00 -0500, Derek Tracy wrote: The biggest reason for the reinstall was because in my contant playing around with DE's and WM's trying to find one that I completely liked. I had KDE, GNOME, E17, FVWM, OpenBOX (I think that is it) all on my system. In all of my toying around I found out a lot about myself, for 1 GUI applications make me work slower and FVWM was and is all I need to make me happy. So I could either unemerge KDE GNOME and the rest (which would surely leave all sorts of unneeded libs and things) or I could reinstall. emerge -C kde-meta gnome emerge depclean -a Thank you. If this system gets over cluttered again I will do just that. Much easier than reinstalling, and the reason for depclean. To me reinstallation sounded a lot easier. Reinstallation is never easier. All it ever does is hide the issues, you never find out how to resolve them. That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable. From what I am seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not mean stable anymore. It's not about stable code, that is up to the upstream developers. arch vs. ~arch is about the stability of the ebuilds, and this is using stable in the same way that Debian do; not changing. An arch ebuild is stable because it has not changed in, usually, at least 30 days. A ~arch ebuild is for testing, it does not mean the program is unstable. I can definately see your point and I have never heard arch and ~arch explained like that. It gives me a lot of food for thought. Again thank you. -- Neil Bothwick First Law of Laboratory Work: To give a big update. In the original post I mentioned that I was in the middle of doing an emerge -e world after changing from x86 to ~x86 Well after the compile completed I did a quick etc-update.. Re-emerged madwifi-driver and ipw2200 ipw2200-firmware nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx (I did not change any other config files) and low and behold after a quick reboot everything was working again. -- - Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
Derek Tracy wrote: [...] (I did not change any other config files) and low and behold after a quick reboot everything was working again. The magic of computers :) -- Naga -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
At Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:23:46 + Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:03:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get the equivalent of a Stage 1 install? When installing a stage 3 you are using packages compiled with the default compiler and USE flags. All I did was set them up as I wanted and rebuilt everything with emerge -e world. The specific change I made in this case was changing -mcpu to G4 and adding -fomit-frame-pointer, which may be unnecessary. But that's not relevant, the emerge -e world is. What about -march ? At one point that was something that you weren't supposed to change unless using stage1. If one changes -march after stage3, are we supposed to first run bootstrap.sh before emerge -e ? Although I always did stage1 installs, I must confess to once getting into trouble by changing USE flags too early. This taught me the advantage of first going stage1--stage2--stage3 with the std USE flags and only then changing USE flags. I realize that in that case one might as well start with stage3 (assuming you can change -march). thanks, allan -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11:20 Wed 16 Nov , Derek Tracy wrote: After restarting I noticed that ipw2200 did not load properly was posted in my boot mesg WTF. I distinctly remembered during the install that I waited until after I installed the kernel, then I went ahead and installed the external modules. (NOTE: I did not use the built in kernel modules for ipw2200 or ieee80211 I had read too many horror stories about incompatible versions of ipw2200-firmware and I have always had good luck with the external drivers) One other thing, instead of going for pure on the edge goodness of using a Nitro-esque kernel (one optimized for speed over stability) I decided to use Gentoo-sources again trusting the developers judgement. After searching through tons of articles regarding ipw2200 drivers not working with the latest Stable Gentoo-Sources I decided to go with the kernel drivers and give them a shot. I recompiled rebooted and low and behold the drivers still weren't working. After trying all sorts of different combinations Unstable versions of this stable versions of that. Nothing worked, so I proceeded to reboot back into the livecd and re-chroot into my system so I could get a network connection and install the Madwifi Drivers, for a pcmcia card that I have laying around. Also note that the Madwifi drivers are considered Unstable. I rebooted the computer and the drivers actually worked (Yea Unstable). So I got the network connection up, then I decided to go ahead and install X (I thought that it would be easier to troubleshoot the ipw drivers from a graphical environment copy, paste, multiple xterms.). Well Maybe this will help a little. I am using the ipw2200 drivers, and they work fine. I am using the gentoo-sources kernel, 2.6.13-r4, with ipw2200-1.0.6-r3. My eix shows ipw2200-firmware 2.3 and 2.4 installed (I guess they are slotted), I'm not sure which one is being loaded. I tried upgrading to 2.6.14, wireless broke (I think that's when I tried loading the 2.4 firmware), so I went back to my current kernel. I'll hang out here for a while, 'til they get the bugs worked out of 2.6.14. I have an ati video, so no help there. My intial approach to my new laptop was a bit different than yours. Though I've been doing Gentoo three years, I've never done it on a laptop, never done Linux or wireless on a laptop. I've had good luck with Ubuntu, wanted to try their newest, so I loaded it up first, to get info on hardware, get a working xorg.conf, etc. Had a fully functional laptop in less than an hour. I then set up a dual boot gentoo, used the xorg.conf from Ubuntu, cherry-picked a few ideas from the nicely done Ubuntu. I've added additional functionality to my Gentoo build as I've needed it. So now, every time I fire up, I always have a choice. I can use the fully loaded Ubuntu, which I love for its ease of installation and administration, or I can use Gentoo, my stripped down hot rod, which on occasion gives me fits. Gentoo gets the nod every time, unless I'm looking for a bit of freecell. Why?, I ask myself. I think it's the same reason I liked to take watches apart when I was a kid. I want to know how things work. I love the Zen-like aesthetic, starting with a blank slate, and adding only what is absolutely essential. No cruft. It's not for everyone, and it's not the only true way. But it works for me. Good Luck Bill Roberts pgpMrNqhSY0Ss.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:52:47 -0500, Allan Gottlieb wrote: What about -march ? At one point that was something that you weren't supposed to change unless using stage1. If one changes -march after stage3, are we supposed to first run bootstrap.sh before emerge -e ? There's no problem with changing -march, you're thinking of changing CHOST, which can break things. The answer is to run fix_libtool_files.sh after changing CHOST. I didn't change CHOST on this machine, because there is only one possible setting for it. -- Neil Bothwick Time is an illusion but never so much as whem you're using a modem. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/17/05, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:03:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1 Neil, Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get the equivalent of a Stage 1 install? When installing a stage 3 you are using packages compiled with the default compiler and USE flags. All I did was set them up as I wanted and rebuilt everything with emerge -e world. The specific change I made in this case was changing -mcpu to G4 and adding -fomit-frame-pointer, which may be unnecessary. But that's not relevant, the emerge -e world is. Thanks Neil. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
At Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:35:27 + Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:52:47 -0500, Allan Gottlieb wrote: What about -march ? At one point that was something that you weren't supposed to change unless using stage1. If one changes -march after stage3, are we supposed to first run bootstrap.sh before emerge -e ? There's no problem with changing -march, you're thinking of changing CHOST, which can break things. The answer is to run fix_libtool_files.sh after changing CHOST. I didn't change CHOST on this machine, because there is only one possible setting for it. You are correct, I meant CHOST. Seeing your answer, I now realize why, unless one is changing bootstrap.sh, there is no need to do a stage1 compile. thank you, allan -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SNIP (DISCLAIMER: Let me start off by saying that this is truly not a flame but more of a concern. So please do not flame me for stating my opinions/concerns.) SNIP Understood. I certainly didn't take it that way. I have been an avid Gentoo User for 2 and 1/2 years now. About the same as me. SNIP In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge). But since this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages. Right. Now since we have the background we will get to the questions at hand. During this install I have run into nothing but problems. SNIP ... with a slight modification I am using LVM2 for /usr /usr/portage /opt /var /tmp /home (I figured I would take advantage of some setuid security procedures). Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. So I installed everything according to the handbook and all went well until I restarted. Yes, but I've done FC installs that did the same thing. It's not limited to Gentoo. BIG SNIP --- IT'S ABOVE MY PAY GRADE So now I am waiting for the whole system to recompile using ~x86 (the so called Unstable packages) and I will see if that works or not. Bummer. The Gentoo install is a lot of work. To completely restart is painful. Was there really no other option? I don't remember you asking about this. Did I miss it? I am seriously reconsidering finding another OS to use, this whole headache has been totally ridiculous. I could see this if I would have emerged all of the unstable packages to begin with or even perform a Stage1 install after the developers decided to make the Stage3 the default. But I didn't I did everything according to the documentation (and I triple checked that I did not skip anything). So with all of this said if the developers do not start testing everything a little more thoroughly then I predict there will be a serious drop in the number of Gentoo Followers out there. Especially if a Gentoo Veteren has this hard of a time installing the operating system that I love. In some ways I agree. I have an AMD64 machine (I'm writing you from it) that has a LOT of packages as ~amd64 to make it usable. I recognize that this is newer hardware and I expected this would be required, but recently I've noticed portage getting hinky about ~x86 vs. ~amd64. My /etc/postage/package.use file is getting weird trying to keep up. Portage is trying to downgrade things that are marked ~x86. I change them to ~amd64 and it lets me keep them. Something feels wrong about that. But at least my system works. (mostly...) I have no complaints. Just concerns... When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should work, yes there will always be configuration glitches but the problems I have had during this install were not from configuration glitches. They are what looks like incompatible packages and numerous other things. If Gentoo is going to continue to grow then we as a community need to speak up about things like this. Well, yes and no. I don't think that 'stable' is the same as 'guaranteed'. None the less I agree with what I think is the sentiment of your statement. In some of the online polls it seems that Gentoo's popularity has dropped a bit lately. Personally I'm more and more impressed with it every day. It's only been on my AMD64 machine that I've seen many issues. I will admit that I have a big concern about an upcoming MySQL update that is probably going to break my whole TV network here. Due to my fear I haven't upgraded MySQL and will likely come back ranting myself sometime in December when I'm probably forced to do it. We'll see... ;-) Best of luck getting the problems worked out. cheers, Mark -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a lot longer than I originally intended it to be so if you want the jist of it skip to the end. (DISCLAIMER: Let me start off by saying that this is truly not a flame but more of a concern. So please do not flame me for stating my opinions/concerns.) Guess you won't get any flames, just considerable advices, cause we don't wanna loose a Gentooer :) I have been an avid Gentoo User for 2 and 1/2 years now. I have installed Gentoo on many different platforms including HPPA and Sparc, not too mention the countless x86 installs. I have never had a problem, every install has went smooth. I have done both Stage3 and Stage1 installs (I have always preferred a Stage1 install). Recently, I decided that it was time to reinstall due to the numerous packages that I had installed and different DE's / WM configurations, and I must admit that I have recently been diving into LVM2 and encryption (I figured that starting from scratch would be my best bet). In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge). But since this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages. I would never even consider completely reinstall a working environment, specially one that installation and configuration is 90% of the work you'll ever have dealing with the machine (except maybe for hardware failures). Now since we have the background we will get to the questions at hand. During this install I have run into nothing but problems. I boot from the livecd just fine (if I append nopcmcia and dolvm2) and everything goes smooth. NOTE: I am performing this install step by step from the online handbook with a slight modification I am using LVM2 for /usr /usr/portage /opt /var /tmp /home (I figured I would take advantage of some setuid security procedures). Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. So I installed everything according to the handbook and all went well until I restarted. You see, I'm one of those guys that think: if you got the livecd working, network, maybe video, sound or anything else with NO DISC, your system is gentooable. :) of course you may run into problems accourding to your config and special needs, it always happened to me, but hey, at least you know what you're doying, not like those easy, complete, fast and general installations that keeps LOTS of trash making your system crawl compared to a clean, wise and configurated environment. After restarting I noticed that ipw2200 did not load properly was posted in my boot mesg WTF. I distinctly remembered during the install that I waited until after I installed the kernel, then I went ahead and installed the external modules. (NOTE: I did not use the built in kernel modules for ipw2200 or ieee80211 I had read too many horror stories about incompatible versions of ipw2200-firmware and I have always had good luck with the external drivers) One other thing, instead of going for pure on the edge goodness of using a Nitro-esque kernel (one optimized for speed over stability) I decided to use Gentoo-sources again trusting the developers judgement. After searching through tons of articles regarding ipw2200 drivers not working with the latest Stable Gentoo-Sources I decided to go with the kernel drivers and give them a shot. I recompiled rebooted and low and behold the drivers still weren't working. After trying all sorts of different combinations Unstable versions of this stable versions of that. Nothing worked, so I proceeded to reboot back into the livecd and re-chroot into my system so I could get a network connection and install the Madwifi Drivers, for a pcmcia card that I have laying around. Also note that the Madwifi drivers are considered Unstable. I rebooted the computer and the drivers actually worked (Yea Unstable). So I got the network connection up, then I decided to go ahead and install X (I thought that it would be easier to troubleshoot the ipw drivers from a graphical environment copy, paste, multiple xterms.). Well I compiled and installed Xorg and compiled and installed nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx, and what do you think happened (btw I copied over a backed up xorg.conf from the last installation so I know that that conf file works and is correct) I went to startx...It kicked back saying screens were found but no usable configs..So down troubleshooting lane I went. I recompiled, verified I did not have agpgart / dri enabled in kernel, then with both in kernel, stable and unstable versions of nvidia-kernel / nvidia-glx, everything a no go.. I finally settled with using Xorg's nv driver. Now here I am with a really nice laptop (Sony S-460) but
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
SNIP I use Gentoo to run all my boxen and I love it. That being said, I have ALWAYS done a stage1 install. Never had a single problem I couldn't fix. Then, suddenly, they switched everything to stage3 and removed a LOT of options from the Gentoo build process. I LIKED being able to modify the bootstrap script. I LIKED editing the ebuilds for certain important system packages during initial system build. Why have they now decided to force us to rebuild our systems if we want to tweak settings? Now I must use a larger hard disc for an install, as all ebuilds install userland binaries to /usr/bin, even if I want to install to /usr/local/netshare/bin as a network shared executable. This a VERY inconvenient, since some system packages (loggers, cron daemons) can be installed on a single server and referenced from other boxen to reduce dependency on hard disk installs. Just a rant here, but Gentoo used to be about choices. Now one of the biggest choices in the Gentoo universe has been taken away from the user. Is Gentoo becoming just another canned off-the-shelf *nix distro? Joshua Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500 Derek Tracy wrote: Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3. (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on other architectures). Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook: Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. WTF? When did this happen? -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
-Original Message- From: Nick Rout Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 3:12 PM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path? On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500 Derek Tracy wrote: Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3. (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on other architectures). Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook: Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. WTF? When did this happen? -- Nick Rout -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list This one caught me off guard as well. I am used to installing from a stage 1 tarball. When I recently installed to my new AMD64 machine, I was surprised to see this was no longer covered in the handbook. It was easily fixed with an emerge system though. -tracy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
Nick Rout wrote: I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3. (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on other architectures). Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook: Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. WTF? When did this happen? About a week or two ago and was heavily discussed on gentoo-doc IIRC. Here's a rough summary. stage1 is the cause of a number of circular dependency issues, it takes forever, the engineering and release team spends too much time on it, and the average Gentoo users get no benefit from doing a stage1 over a stage3. In order to get any benefit from stage1 you must edit the boot strap scripts in some way. Editting the boot strap scripts is not documented and not something general users should be mucking around in so we're going to drop everything, but stage3 on the CD. Or at least that was my interpretation. I stopped paying attention around this point, but there was talk of keeping a stage1 for devs or people who need it... though I don't think exactly what or where was ever fully hashed out. kashani -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:12, Nick Rout wrote: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500 Derek Tracy wrote: Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3. (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on other architectures). Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook: Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. To be honest, this is the first time i see this. I always did stage 1 installs. Haven't done so in a while that's why I'm a little surprised about this. What exactly were the reasons for such a move? pgpFcARz5HFlg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:12, Nick Rout wrote: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500 Derek Tracy wrote: Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3. (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on other architectures). Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook: Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. To be honest, this is the first time i see this. I always did stage 1 installs. Haven't done so in a while that's why I'm a little surprised about this. What exactly were the reasons for such a move? I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks. Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1 allows me to get the machine up and running sooner. Just my take on the question. Cheers, Mark -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Daniel da Veiga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a lot longer than I originally intended it to be so if you want the jist of it skip to the end. (DISCLAIMER: Let me start off by saying that this is truly not a flame but more of a concern.So please do not flame me for stating my opinions/concerns.)Guess you won't get any flames, just considerable advices, cause we don't wanna loose a Gentooer :) I have been an avid Gentoo User for 2 and 1/2 years now.I have installed Gentoo on many different platforms including HPPA and Sparc, not too mention the countless x86 installs.I have never had a problem, every install has went smooth.I have done both Stage3 and Stage1 installs (I have always preferred a Stage1 install). Recently, I decided that it was time to reinstall due to the numerous packages that I had installed and different DE's / WM configurations, and I must admit that I have recently been diving into LVM2 and encryption (I figured that starting from scratch would be my best bet).In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge).But since this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages.I would never even consider completely reinstall a working environment, specially one that installation and configuration is 90%of the work you'll ever have dealing with the machine (except maybefor hardware failures).The biggest reason for the reinstall was because in my contant playing around with DE's and WM's trying to find one that I completely liked. I had KDE, GNOME, E17, FVWM, OpenBOX (I think that is it) all on my system. In all of my toying around I found out a lot about myself, for 1 GUI applications make me work slower and FVWM was and is all I need to make me happy. So I could either unemerge KDE GNOME and the rest (which would surely leave all sorts of unneeded libs and things) or I could reinstall. To me reinstallation sounded a lot easier. Also note that this is the first time that I have had a really hard time getting Gentoo to work. (I will most likely never reinstall on this machine again.) Now since we have the background we will get to the questions at hand. During this install I have run into nothing but problems.I boot from the livecd just fine (if I append nopcmcia and dolvm2) and everything goes smooth.NOTE: I am performing this install step by step from the online handbook with a slight modification I am using LVM2 for /usr /usr/portage /opt /var /tmp /home (I figured I would take advantage of some setuid security procedures).Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install.I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot.So I installed everything according to the handbook and all went well until I restarted.You see, I'm one of those guys that think: if you got the livecdworking, network, maybe video, sound or anything else with NO DISC,your system is gentooable. :) of course you may run into problems accourding to your config and special needs, it always happened to me,but hey, at least you know what you're doying, not like those easy,complete, fast and general installations that keeps LOTS of trashmaking your system crawl compared to a clean, wise and configurated environment. After restarting I noticed that ipw2200 did not load properly was posted in my boot mesg WTF.I distinctly remembered during the install that I waited until after I installed the kernel, then I went ahead and installed the external modules.(NOTE: I did not use the built in kernel modules for ipw2200 or ieee80211 I had read too many horror stories about incompatible versions of ipw2200-firmware and I have always had good luck with the external drivers)One other thing, instead of going for pure on the edge goodness of using a Nitro-esque kernel (one optimized for speed over stability) I decided to use Gentoo-sources again trusting the developers judgement.After searching through tons of articles regarding ipw2200 drivers not working with the latest Stable Gentoo-Sources I decided to go with the kernel drivers and give them a shot.I recompiled rebooted and low and behold the drivers still weren't working.After trying all sorts of different combinations Unstable versions of this stable versions of that. Nothing worked, so I proceeded to reboot back into the livecd and re-chroot into my system so I could get a network connection and install the Madwifi Drivers, for a pcmcia card that I have laying around.Also note that the Madwifi drivers are considered Unstable.I rebooted the computer and the drivers actually worked (Yea Unstable).So I got the network connection up, then I decided to go ahead and install X (I thought that it would be easier to troubleshoot the ipw drivers from a graphical environment copy, paste, multiple
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
Nick Rout wrote: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:20:36 -0500 Derek Tracy wrote: Part way through the online handbook I noticed that they standardized the Stage3 install. I figured that since the developers thought it was best to use a Stage3 install then why not give it a shot. I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3. (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on other architectures). Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook: Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. WTF? When did this happen? The archived thread from the gentoo-releng list: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.releng/333 Note that it's not terribly difficult to use catalyst to build a stage1 from a stage3: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/releng/catalyst/2.x/reference.xml Zac -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote: I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks. Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1 allows me to get the machine up and running sooner. Just my take on the question. Cheers, Mark True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set up server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the installation is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I don't really touch it except for security related updates. Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an option doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me. pgpL1ivWPzUm4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
I couldn't have said it better myself.On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote: I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks. Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1 allows me to get the machine up and running sooner. Just my take on the question. Cheers, Mark True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set upserver using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the installationis finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I don't really touch it except for security related updates.Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an optiondoesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me. -- -Derek Tracy[EMAIL PROTECTED]-
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 14:30:28 -0600 kashani wrote: Nick Rout wrote: I read your message and was surprised at this. Last time I read the handbooks the Handbook gave stage 1/2/3 options and the 2005.1 handbook stuck to stage 3. (Talking x86 here, I have never done an instal on other architectures). Now, like you, I read this in the Handbook: Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. WTF? When did this happen? About a week or two ago and was heavily discussed on gentoo-doc IIRC. Here's a rough summary. stage1 is the cause of a number of circular dependency issues, it takes forever, the engineering and release team spends too much time on it, and the average Gentoo users get no benefit from doing a stage1 over a stage3. In order to get any benefit from stage1 you must edit the boot strap scripts in some way. Editting the boot strap scripts is not documented and not something general users should be mucking around in so we're going to drop everything, but stage3 on the CD. Or at least that was my interpretation. I stopped paying attention around this point, but there was talk of keeping a stage1 for devs or people who need it... though I don't think exactly what or where was ever fully hashed out. kashani Thanks for the info. I have only used stage 1 once, and it was for an i586 machine (FYI an epia eden (http://gentoo-wiki.com/Safe_Cflags#Eden_C3.2FEzra_.28Via_EPIA.29) This is because there weren't stage 3's available for i586, so I had to compile the lot from stage 1 (at least as i read the instructions at that point). Frankly I think that a stage 3 is ok 99% of the time, I am just surprised to see gentoo limiting choices, even for the other 1%. I am also surprised that it wasn't given wider publicity in the lead up to the change - this sort of thing should be referred to this list IMHO. This list is high enough volume without having to sub to gentoo-doc as well to pick up important changes. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote: I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks. Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1 allows me to get the machine up and running sooner. Just my take on the question. Cheers, Mark True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set up server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the installation is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I don't really touch it except for security related updates. Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an option doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me. Good points. I agree it doesn't seem like the Gentoo way to remove options, however, in response to Derek's original point about rising or fallign numbers of Gentoo new users it might be wise to make the default install Stage 3, thus making the newest users most likely more successful, and then create some (not so obvious) option to allow folks like you that have good reasons to do Stage 1 if they want it. I know not what I speak of as I cannot even imagine anymore why I'd want to do a Stage 1 install, but I do assume all that work must have some value to others. Take care, Mark -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
I also want to reiterate that if they are going to make a Stage3 install the default then make it a rock solid release. And in my opinion portage needs to be pruned not only of un-maintained packages but also of packages that conflict with others. Like I said before a Stable tree should be just that Stable. There is no reason someone should have to completely change to the Unstable branch when all of the programs that he / she wants are marked stable for that arch. On 11/16/05, Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/16/05, Benjamin Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 16 November 2005 21:47, Mark Knecht wrote: I'm not a developer and I've never done a Stage 1 install so I cannot say for sure, but it's my understanding that after a Stage 3 install most people end up rebuilding everything anyway within a few weeks. Very soon my Stage 3 and your Stage 1 are identical. The Stage 1 allows me to get the machine up and running sooner. Just my take on the question. Cheers, Mark True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set up server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the installation is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I don't really touch it except for security related updates. Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an option doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me.Good points. I agree it doesn't seem like the Gentoo way to remove options, however, in response to Derek's original point about risingor fallign numbers of Gentoo new users it might be wise to make thedefault install Stage 3, thus making the newest users most likely moresuccessful, and then create some (not so obvious) option to allow folks like you that have good reasons to do Stage 1 if they want it.I know not what I speak of as I cannot even imagine anymore why I'dwant to do a Stage 1 install, but I do assume all that work must have some value to others.Take care,Mark--gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list-- - Derek Tracy[EMAIL PROTECTED]-
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
Mark Knecht wrote: Good points. I agree it doesn't seem like the Gentoo way to remove options, however, in response to Derek's original point about rising or fallign numbers of Gentoo new users it might be wise to make the default install Stage 3, thus making the newest users most likely more successful, and then create some (not so obvious) option to allow folks like you that have good reasons to do Stage 1 if they want it. I know not what I speak of as I cannot even imagine anymore why I'd want to do a Stage 1 install, but I do assume all that work must have some value to others. It appears that you can still do the equivalent of a Stage 1 install using the Stage 3 tarball - the Handbook points to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/faq.xml#stage12 which has instructions on how to re-bootstrap the system and rebuild with new compiler flags. -- Manuel A. McLure KE6TAW [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mclure.org ...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law, no man may kill a cat. -- H.P. Lovecraft -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:50 pm, Derek Tracy wrote: That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable. From what I am seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not mean stable anymore. But thats not what you said. I Quote: In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge). But since this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific packages. This means your MIXING the two and is only recommended once the system is up. During an install, you should do one or the other, not start mixing and matching. HOWEVER, if you did set all to x86, and havent touched package.keyword, read the next paragraph. Stable is fine.. I really dont understand how some modules have ANY thing to do with being x86 or ~x86.. Modules are always finicky, no matter what linux distro you use.. You probably are just forgetting to compile in the kernel options you had before, that you do not now have. (Guessing of course). Sounds to me you just re-installed before making sure you had all your ducks in a row and blaming it on gentoo. I havent seen anything in your message that I can say, gentoo did it, and you didnt do it yourself.. It all really just sounds like configuration issues, that happens on all new install, no matter the distro, x86/~x86, or otherwise. Jeff pgpSicLjtDkbI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:55 pm, Benjamin Martin wrote: True that the installations become identical very soon. But what if I set up server using stage 1 and an up-to-date portage tree. After the installation is finished it'll sit around doing whatever it's supposed to do and I don't really touch it except for security related updates. Just an example where stage 1 was a nice option. Taking away such an option doesn't sound all too much like the gentoo way to me. They are not taking it away. They just dont support it, big difference.. We just went through all this not a few weeks ago, why are we going through this again? Jeff pgpgThL66IHyN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should work, I'm not sure this is always possible. Much of your complaint comes from the ipw2200 driver, which is new in 2.6.14. But the in-kernel version is several versions older than the external driver. So should 2.6.14 remain marked as unstable because of this one driver that works for some people, but not for others? Or because a specific externally maintained driver or package doesn't build against it? On my system, either the in-kernel or external drivers work fine. The only caveat is that I need firmware version 2.2 with the in-kernel drivers, and a different version for the external. If I am using the external version, the portage dependancy tree makes sure I have the right version of the firmware. But the kernel sources do not (and should not) depend upon the ipw2200-firmware package, so this is a case where I need to know the driver requirements. (Also, the kernel help specifies that the driver requires external firmware, although it doesn't specify what version.) Regarding the X.org issue, without an Xorg.0.log file, it is really impossible to say what the problem there is. It could be something as simple as your kernel configuration; for example leaving out I2C or AGP support could cause this. But in my view, you cannot take an existing xorg.conf file and expect it to work without any issues _without_ duplicating the same system configuration (kernel version, kernel config, and nvidia driver version). The fastest method of configuring X on a new system is to run X -configure, test the resulting configuration, and use that xorg.conf file. Yes, this would use the opensource x.org Nv driver, but it should definitely work for getting X up and running. If this doesn't work, then you have reason to complain. If the proprietary nvidia driver doesn't work with a particular kernel version, you can only complain to nvidia. I'm quite sure a binary-based distribution would have worked better for you in this case, only because nothing would have been upgraded or changed. Everything that worked before would have continued to work, just like everything that was broken before would have continued to be broken. It is the price of progress, IMO. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also want to reiterate that if they are going to make a Stage3 install the default then make it a rock solid release. And in my opinion portage needs to be pruned not only of un-maintained packages but also of packages that conflict with others. What conflicts? Please be specific. The best would be to report any such conflicts to bugs.gentoo.org. The gentoo developers do not have the time to test every possible combination of packages. So they test what they can, and rely on us to tell them when problems arise. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Jeff Smelser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:50 pm, Derek Tracy wrote: That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable. From what I am seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not mean stable anymore.But thats not what you said. I Quote:In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge). Butsince this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred method and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specificpackages. This means your MIXING the two and is only recommended once the system is up.During an install, you should do one or the other, not start mixing andmatching. HOWEVER, if you did set all to x86, and havent touched package.keyword, read the next paragraph.I did not set any of the flags as I wanted to get the system up and running first. What I was doing was pointing out that if I needed to set the ~x86 flag on any packages then I would do so via the above stated file. Stable is fine.. I really dont understand how some modules have ANY thing to do with being x86 or ~x86..Modules are always finicky, no matter what linuxdistro you use.. You probably are just forgetting to compile in the kerneloptions you had before, that you do not now have. (Guessing of course). Been there and checked that. Confirmed to not be the case. Sounds to me you just re-installed before making sure you had all your ducksin a row and blaming it on gentoo. I havent seen anything in your messagethat I can say, gentoo did it, and you didnt do it yourself.. It all really just sounds like configuration issues, that happens on all new install, nomatter the distro, x86/~x86, or otherwise.I would have to disagree with you on this. I do not believe that it is a config issue I beleive that many of the x86 packages still do not play well with each other, that is what I am saying needs fixed. Jeff-- - Derek Tracy[EMAIL PROTECTED]-
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Richard Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a branch is marked stable all of the packages in that branch should work,I'm not sure this is always possible.Much of your complaint comes from the ipw2200 driver, which is new in 2.6.14.But the in-kernelversion is several versions older than the external driver.So should2.6.14 remain marked as unstable because of this one driver that works for some people, but not for others?Or because a specific externallymaintained driver or package doesn't build against it?On my system, either the in-kernel or external drivers work fine.Theonly caveat is that I need firmware version 2.2 with the in-kerneldrivers, and a different version for the external.If I am using theexternal version, the portage dependancy tree makes sure I have theright version of the firmware.But the kernel sources do not (and should not) depend upon the ipw2200-firmware package, so this is acase where I need to know the driver requirements.(Also, the kernelhelp specifies that the driver requires external firmware, although it doesn't specify what version.)What I am complaining about is that neither of the drivers will work. Regarding the X.org issue, without an Xorg.0.log file, it is reallyimpossible to say what the problem there is.It could be something assimple as your kernel configuration; for example leaving out I2C or AGP support could cause this.But in my view, you cannot take an existing xorg.conf file and expectit to work without any issues _without_ duplicating the same systemconfiguration (kernel version, kernel config, and nvidia driver version).The fastest method of configuring X on a new system is torun X -configure, test the resulting configuration, and use thatxorg.conf file.Yes, this would use the opensource x.org Nv driver,but it should definitely work for getting X up and running.If thisdoesn't work, then you have reason to complain.I have tried both ways. My reasoning for taking my old config was originally for the Modeline info. The only reason that I arbitrarily threw it into the newly built system was because the X -configure did not work (even after I switched the dev/mouse to /dev/input/mice) I get the same error with both of the configs. If the proprietary nvidia driver doesn't work with a particular kernelversion, you can only complain to nvidia. I have had that happen in the past and would not ever think about blaming the Gentoo Developers for NVidias work. I'm quite sure a binary-based distribution would have worked betterfor you in this case, only because nothing would have been upgraded orchanged.Everything that worked before would have continued to work,just like everything that was broken before would have continued to be broken.It is the price of progress, IMO.-Richard--gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list-- - Derek Tracy[EMAIL PROTECTED]-
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:44:49 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SNIP I use Gentoo to run all my boxen and I love it. That being said, I have ALWAYS done a stage1 install. Never had a single problem I couldn't fix. Then, suddenly, they switched everything to stage3 and removed a LOT of options from the Gentoo build process. [snip] Now one of the biggest choices in the Gentoo universe has been taken away from the user. Is Gentoo becoming just another canned off-the-shelf *nix distro? No choices have been removed, from the build process, nothing has been taken away from the user. all that has changed is that the Gentoo Handbook describes a Stage 3 installation, Stage 1 is still possible, the instructions have been moved to the FAQ. I have always done Stage 1 installs in the past, but my last install was from Stage 3, because I needed the system working in less than two hours, which it was. Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1, but with the advantage of being able to do some work on the computer at the same time. Unless I was doing something very specialised, I think I'll stick with Stage 3 plus rebuild in future. -- Neil Bothwick Deja Moo: The feeling that you heard this bull somewhere before. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
Derek Tracy wrote: I also want to reiterate that if they are going to make a Stage3 install the default then make it a rock solid release. And in my opinion portage needs to be pruned not only of un-maintained packages but also of packages that conflict with others. Like I said before a Stable tree should be just that Stable. There is no reason someone should have to completely change to the Unstable branch when all of the programs that he / she wants are marked stable for that arch. My understanding is that you're way more likely to have issues starting from a stage1, I know I have. Moving general users to stage3 is an attempt to eliminate variables and streamline the testing that goes into a release. By streamlining the testing you can increase the actual amount of testing you can do without increasing the overhead. kashani -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:44:49 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I use Gentoo to run all my boxen and I love it. That being said, I | have ALWAYS done a stage1 install. Never had a single problem I | couldn't fix. Then, suddenly, they switched everything to stage3 and | removed a LOT of options from the Gentoo build process. Pff, no we didn't. You can still do a stage1 if you really want to, but it's no longer necessary. See, stage1s exist because when stages were built with stager, using a stage1 was the only way to get a complete correct vdb. These days we use catalyst, not stager, and even stage3s come with a correct vdb. There's no longer a need for a stage1. If you still want all the choice, which is entirely reasonable for some people, then install from a stage3, customise whatever you want and then do emerge -e world twice. You'll get the same end result, and not have all the problems with circular dependencies. [ Note: looks like I'm missing half this thread because certain jackasses are posting HTML messages to the list. You'd think people would've learned by now... ] -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Look! Shiny things!) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I am complaining about is that neither of the drivers will work. What doesn't work? Does the module build? Does it load? What errors do you get? Does it work if you run the same kernel version and driver you used before? If the combination of a specific kernel version and driver doesn't work with your card, report it via bugs.gentoo.org (and preferably also the ipw2200 bug tracker). I have tried both ways. My reasoning for taking my old config was originally for the Modeline info. The only reason that I arbitrarily threw it into the newly built system was because the X -configure did not work (even after I switched the dev/mouse to /dev/input/mice) I get the same error with both of the configs. Post the /var/log/xorg.0.log file with the error (in a new thread please!), so we can help figure out what the problem is. Lots of people are using nvidia graphics boards with Gentoo, with the proprietary drivers, so in the absence of any actual data, the assumption has to be it is something specific with your configuration. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Derek Tracy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would have to disagree with you on this. I do not believe that it is a config issue I beleive that many of the x86 packages still do not play well with each other, that is what I am saying needs fixed. Again, be specific please. Give us actual error messages or log entries so we see what problems you are running into. Although I run completely ~x86 (along with lots of unmasked stuff), many (most?) of the people here are running the stable tree, without the major conflicts you are claiming. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [ Note: looks like I'm missing half this thread because certain jackasses are posting HTML messages to the list. You'd think people would've learned by now... ] We've tried educating about the evils of HTML (and top-posting). It always degenerates into a flame war. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On 11/16/05, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then I was able to tweak my USE flags and CFLAGS and rebuild the system to the same as I'd have got from Stage 1 Neil, Would you mind sharing what changes you made to your CFLAGS to get the equivalent of a Stage 1 install? Thanks, Mark -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path?
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:50:00 -0500, Derek Tracy wrote: The biggest reason for the reinstall was because in my contant playing around with DE's and WM's trying to find one that I completely liked. I had KDE, GNOME, E17, FVWM, OpenBOX (I think that is it) all on my system. In all of my toying around I found out a lot about myself, for 1 GUI applications make me work slower and FVWM was and is all I need to make me happy. So I could either unemerge KDE GNOME and the rest (which would surely leave all sorts of unneeded libs and things) or I could reinstall. emerge -C kde-meta gnome emerge depclean -a Much easier than reinstalling, and the reason for depclean. To me reinstallation sounded a lot easier. Reinstallation is never easier. All it ever does is hide the issues, you never find out how to resolve them. That is what I was thinking when I switched to stable. From what I am seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not mean stable anymore. It's not about stable code, that is up to the upstream developers. arch vs. ~arch is about the stability of the ebuilds, and this is using stable in the same way that Debian do; not changing. An arch ebuild is stable because it has not changed in, usually, at least 30 days. A ~arch ebuild is for testing, it does not mean the program is unstable. -- Neil Bothwick First Law of Laboratory Work: signature.asc Description: PGP signature
