On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 19:58 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2004 04:53, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > Rac pointed me to the following thread:
> >   http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=254119
> >
> > In short, he advises to use stage3 even if you want to perform a stage1 or
> > stage2 so that you won't have issues with things like circular dependencies
> > (foo depends on bar which depends on foo) and files on your system that
> > aren't registered in Portage' DB.
> 
> For what it's worth, I fully agree with this. After every release, a few bugs 
> come in about broken bootstraps - especially with regards to the perl USE 
> flag. Circular dependency handling should be done properly by about the time 
> of 2005.1 though.
> 
> Possibly more important is the fact that the portage db is stripped for a 
> stage1 (and stage2?) tarball. This means that there are many files left 
> behind that are never removed. This also has the ability cause bugs, which 
> are unfortunately much harder to track down.

Then why don't we quit stripping it?  I'm sure whomever's idea it was to
strip /var/db/pkg in these tarballs isn't around anymore, anyway.  Who's
to say we cannot reverse that decision?

> Robert's solution is much better, but thus far I've been doing:
> tar jxfvp stage3; chroot; ... ; nano -w /etc/make.conf ;
> emerge -e system; emerge -e system; emerge depclean

...or we could fix it, so it would be more like:
tar vxjpf stage1; chroot; ... ; nano -w /etc/make.conf;
scripts/bootstrap.sh; emerge -e system

We could have the bootstrap script force re-installation of packages,
even if they were "up to date".  We also could add a depclean to the end
of the script, to automatically remove the unwanted pieces, rather than
forcing the user to do it.

> Changing that first "emerge -e system" into bootstrap.sh would save a lot of 
> time though. ;)

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Operational/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux