| 1 |
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:29 -0500, solar wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Now, on the topic of the tarballs. |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2 |
| 5 |
> > tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Stage1: Changing CHOST= and run ./bootstrap.sh |
| 8 |
> (well you can do it but it's dumb) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Right. You can do it. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> Stage3: has full cxx/berkdb/ssl/pam/libwrap and all the cruft pulled in |
| 13 |
> from having use flags enabled thats not easy to get rid of otherwise. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
You can accomplish this, too. Maybe we could even use that nice little |
| 16 |
"scripts" directory in the portage tree to write a script to assist in |
| 17 |
performing this. I'm sure it would be less error-prone than what we |
| 18 |
have now with the broken QA procedures allowing things to go into |
| 19 |
system, or system-depended packages, that pulls in all kinds of useless |
| 20 |
crap. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> I don't care what you do with the docs, but the stages 1, 3 need to |
| 23 |
> stay. stage2 has always been a bonus stage more or less added into the |
| 24 |
> mix cuz it's a byproduct of stage building (pre catalyst days). |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Removing the stage1 and stage2 instructions from the Handbook has |
| 27 |
already reduced the number of errors being reported by new users to me. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 31 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 32 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 33 |
Games - Developer |
| 34 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives