Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Andrew Muraco <tuxp3@×××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] 2006.0 - me having a bad day?
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:57:47
Message-Id: 440277DD.4050300@leetworks.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] 2006.0 - me having a bad day? by Kalin KOZHUHAROV
1 Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
2
3 >Contgrats to the release team :-)
4 >
5 >But let me whine a bit, even a few KB:
6 >
7 >I just saw the GWN and the news about 2006.0 ...
8 >
9 >So reading at the release notes:
10 >
11 >
12 >>This is also the first release with the Gentoo Linux Installer
13 >>officially debuting on the x86 LiveCD, which will fully replace the
14 >>Universal and PackageCD set. The LiveCD also features a fully-fledged
15 >>Gnome environment.
16 >>
17 >>
18 >
19 >However the (normal) link to download it:
20 >http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/where.xml
21 >Shows:
22 >
23 >Gentoo 2006.0 Minimal install CD
24 >(around 125 megabytes depending on arch)
25 >alpha amd64 hppa ia64 ppc (32 bit) ppc64 sparc64 x86
26 >
27 >Gentoo 2006.0 Universal install CD
28 >(up to 600 megabytes depending on arch)
29 >alpha amd64 hppa ppc (32 bit) ppc (64 bit) sparc64
30 >
31 >Gentoo 2006.0 Package CD
32 >(up to 700 megabytes depending on arch)
33 >amd64 ppc (ppc) ppc (g4) ppc (64 bit - 32bit userland) ppc (64 bit - 64bit userland) sparc64
34 >
35 >So there are the Minimal, Universal and Package CDs...
36 >
37 >No word of a LiveCD...
38 >No link to a Universal CD for x86...
39 >
40 >Browsing trough the torrents, there is a x86-livecd-2006.0 and
41 >x86-installcd-2006.0 ...
42 >
43 >yes, I figured out that x86-installcd-2006.0 is the "Gentoo 2006.0
44 >Minimal install CD" for x86 or is it... will any n00b figure it out?
45 >
46 >And probably the properly(?) named livecd-amd64-installer-2006.0 and
47 >install-amd64-universal-2006.0 are here just to add some spice to the
48 >soup...
49 >Aha if I track all links in the bouncer, I start to understand...
50 >So, a link like that:
51 >http://bouncer.gentoo.org/?productgentoo-2006.0-universal&os=amd64
52 >is for the Gentoo 2006.0 Universal install CD for amd64 arch - cool!
53 >And it will bring you to install-amd64-universal-2006.0.iso! So just
54 >s/gentoo/install/ and stuff the os=(.*) in the middle - a piece of cake.
55 >Aaah, however forget about the "Gentoo 2006.0 Package CD" - they have a
56 >naming on their own and its scheme is too difficult to explain in a long
57 >mail like that.
58 >
59 >Just to toss a random example:
60 >packages-ppc64-32ul-2006.0.iso comes for ppc (64 bit - 32bit userland)
61 >of a "Gentoo 2006.0 Package CD". The correspondence between "Universal
62 >install CD" and "install-", "Package CD" and "packageS" is a drill left
63 >to the reader :-)
64 >
65 >And we are talking consistency here, yes simple as that. There are
66 >probably(?) good reasons behind the naming of the iso files (the torrent
67 >list does not show the .iso, but who cares, once you stuff it
68 >in your client you'll see it is an iso, right!), but are they good
69 >enough for inconsistent naming? Or there is a scheme I cannot guess...
70 >
71 >They might be good reasons not to include the Universal instal CD (i.e.
72 >which one in the torrents? aha, probably after all there is no
73 >Universal install CD for x86, it is called a LiveCD??? or /me again
74 >wrong...) in the bouncer - sure that is the most wanted CD, but that eats
75 >the most bandwidth.
76 >Or is it because it was hard to write the XML of the page because it is a
77 >structured, clerly defined language and makes it difficult to use
78 >inconsistent naming of the iso files?? Well, if that was the reason...
79 >
80 >But who knows. I might be just having a bad morning transforming into a
81 >bad day... I din't have enough time or will to help with the release, so I
82 >can only whine out loud. If you've read so far, fell free to light up
83 >your flamethrower, I should be able to stand it, or simply turn to ash.
84 >
85 >Kalin.
86 >
87 >
88 >
89 I second that there is a massive confusion of naming, and this needs to
90 get sorted out (or atleast explained) Because I'm sure the mirrors will
91 start getting slamed with people downloading 2006.0. Lets not waste
92 anyone's bandwidth nor the mirrors by leading people to download the
93 wrong thing.
94
95 Regards,
96 Tux
97 --
98 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] 2006.0 - me having a bad day? Jeffrey Forman <jforman@g.o>