Re: [gentoo-dev] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation

[solar]

On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:58 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:29 -0500, solar wrote:
> > > Now, on the topic of the tarballs.
> > >
> > > Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2
> > > tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball.
> >
> > Stage1: Changing CHOST= and run ./bootstrap.sh
> > (well you can do it but it's dumb)
>
> Right.  You can do it.
>
> > Stage3: has full cxx/berkdb/ssl/pam/libwrap and all the cruft pulled in
> > from having use flags enabled thats not easy to get rid of otherwise.
>
> You can accomplish this, too.  Maybe we could even use that nice little
> "scripts" directory in the portage tree to write a script to assist in
> performing this.  I'm sure it would be less error-prone than what we
> have now with the broken QA procedures allowing things to go into
> system, or system-depended packages, that pulls in all kinds of useless
> crap.
>
> > I don't care what you do with the docs, but the stages 1, 3 need to
> > stay. stage2 has always been a bonus stage more or less added into the
> > mix cuz it's a byproduct of stage building (pre catalyst days).
>
> Removing the stage1 and stage2 instructions from the Handbook has
> already reduced the number of errors being reported by new users to me.

While I'm glad your getting less bugs/errors reported, I'm a little 
sad that you had stage1 install instructions removed. 
Starting from stage1 is the basic hardened way. Most of our users 
(which seem to be 10% of the userbase) start from that stage due to 
hardened only shipping it's stages as i386-pc-linux-gnu and honestly 
most users are i686-pc-linux-gnu so they end up changing this. 
We ship as i386 to ensure all x86 compatibility.

I hope that you can arrange for either the stage1 install instructions
to be put back in or split off into it's own stage1.xml doc.


-- 
solar <solar@g.o>
Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list