| 1 |
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:31 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 04:30:30PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 5 |
>> >> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in |
| 6 |
>> >> random package(s) a la binary-distribution style |
| 7 |
>> > |
| 8 |
>> > What about the stages? Don't we need some form of net support in |
| 9 |
>> > stage 3? |
| 10 |
>> > |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> That's debatable. For a typical install, the user has to install other |
| 13 |
>> basic stuff like a boot loader, kernel, etc. So having them also |
| 14 |
>> select a network config framework seems logical. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> Is there a use case for a stage3 in which installing netifrc by hand |
| 17 |
>> is impractical? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Personally, I don't know of one. Does anyone else? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Thinking on this further, the same logic could be applied to |
| 23 |
sys-apps/openrc, and probably a few other packages that are not |
| 24 |
build/toolchain critical. I suppose we need to draw a sanity line |
| 25 |
somewhere. ^_^ |
Archives