Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Wernfried Haas <amne@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: bootstrapping since gcc 3.4 is stable
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:14:49
Message-Id: 20060126170805.GA12633@superlupo.rechner
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: bootstrapping since gcc 3.4 is stable by MIkey
1 On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 10:42:04AM -0600, MIkey wrote:
2 > Why I explained a couple of posts further down. I could not duplicate the
3 > problem either, I think it went away in 3.4.4-r1. I don't like posting bug
4 > reports that I can't duplicate and I prefer to be able to either post a
5 > patch or suggest a solution unless it is a trivial matter.
6
7 So you complain about a problem that is already fixed as if it still
8 exists? I really don't get it.
9
10 > Which promptly scrolled off of the screen a few days later, never again to
11 > be found unless you know to search for it or read through all of the forums
12 > before doing what the installation handbook describes.
13
14 As said at least 2 times before, why don't you file a bug report to
15 improve the docs then?
16
17 > And this is the primary point I am arguing. I keep hearing it, over and
18 > over. My testing leads me to a much different conclusion, I offered
19 > details describing why I reached my conclusions.
20
21 Your tests are - if i may say so - completely flawed. You disregard
22 the fact that the basic installation time of stage 3 is much lower
23 than the one of stage 1. Unpack the bugger, compile a kernel, that's
24 it. Not much trouble to be expected either - differently to stage 1.
25
26 Of course you may spend some time now recompiling stuff with your
27 favourite CFLAGS and upgrading gcc, but you can do that while your
28 system is already installed and fully productive (read: watching your
29 favourite movie or writing mails to gentoo-dev) instead of waiting for
30 stage 1 to finish. You don't even have to do it immedeately but
31 whenever you think it's a good time.
32 Furthermore problems with upgrading gcc after the install are most
33 likely easier to solve than a bailed out stage 1.
34
35 > It is the developers that
36 > decided to stop supporting the stage1 installation method, without asking
37 > users. I am asking you all to justify that decision, preferrably with
38 > facts.
39
40 Already been discussed a zillion times, please search the archives.
41
42 > I am claiming that that the stage1 installation method is in fact
43 > much easier, quicker, cleaner, and more dependable. I have still not heard
44 > a reasonable argument to refute that basic assertion. I have heard vague
45 > claims but no quantification.
46
47 It simply isn't, it's slower (see above) and more things can break.
48 If you want hard proof, go search bugzilla, but don't make us do it
49 for you.
50
51 I have to admit i often did stage 1 installs because i found it quite
52 funny and a good way to test new hardware. Fact is, stage 1 went away
53 for some reasons and we'll just have to get over it. If you really
54 care that much about Gentoo as you claim, accept the decisions of the
55 people behind the stages and try to help improving the supported stage
56 3 install.
57
58 cheers,
59 Wernfried
60
61 --
62 Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
63 Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org
64 IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bootstrapping since gcc 3.4 is stable MIkey <mikey@×××××××××××.com>