1 |
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 20:18 +0100, Sven Vermeulen wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 05:44:25PM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
3 |
> > I am currently working to have a <warn> section added to the Handbook |
4 |
> > stating that we highly recommend that users not touch stages 1 or 2. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Honestly, if we need to update the installation instructions to highly |
7 |
> discourage the use of stage1 or stage2, I'd rather remove stage1/2 |
8 |
> alltogether from the guide and inform the interested users elsewhere on |
9 |
> bootstrapping and such. |
10 |
|
11 |
I would have no issues with that. The simple truth is that no user |
12 |
should be using a stage1 tarball for doing an installation. There's |
13 |
simply no need for it. It introduces countless possibilities for |
14 |
errors, and if you're just unpacking a tarball, running bootstrap.sh, |
15 |
and then emerge -e system, you're not gaining anything. It would be a |
16 |
different story if the user was hand-modifying the bootstrap script to |
17 |
produce a highly modified base system for building, such as if they were |
18 |
adding distcc/ccache/cross-compiling support. As it stands now, most |
19 |
users are doing it for the rice factor. Compiling from stage1 increases |
20 |
the size of their ePenis and gives Release Engineering countless more |
21 |
bugs to contend with after every release. |
22 |
|
23 |
> I mean, we could very well post this in the Gentoo FAQ, with a few |
24 |
> paragraphs about how and why we don't recommend it. |
25 |
|
26 |
This sounds like a good plan. |
27 |
|
28 |
I would say that at this point, we're merely discussing it, since I feel |
29 |
like we're going to have a very hard time convincing some developers. |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Chris Gianelloni |
33 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
34 |
x86 Architecture Team |
35 |
Games - Developer |
36 |
Gentoo Linux |