Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is GWN dead?

[b.n.]

James ha scritto:
> OK, fine, then why doesn't of the persons that says it so easy, just take
> a GRMl (or whatever)  cd and add the minimal (non gui) stuff to the same
> cd and make a simple to use 'install cd' for gentoo that is unofficial?

Because you don't have to add *anything* to such cd.
-What do you need to install Gentoo? A working Linux live cd with a
terminal and chroot.
-Are a terminal and chroot available on 99.9% of Linux live cds in the
world? Yes.

Since I installed Gentoo actually *only* from non-Gentoo cds in my life
(Knoppix or Kubuntu), I can *guarantee* nothing Gentoo-specific is
needed on such cds.

Sure, a list pointing to good, known live cds could be fine.

> Wouldn't it be easy for all of those whose answer this installation
> question over and over and over, to make a basic install cd on top of GRMl
> once and be done with it?

But IT'S ALREADY A BASIC INSTALL CD by itself! :)

> Well, I differ with this statement 100%. What, IMHO, needs to happened is the
> whole install process be changed to a minimal working kernel and basic tools.
> Then you fork the install in the direction as to what the system is to be
> used for: embedded-gentoo, firewall, bridge, managed switch, server
> (mail, web, dns, terminal etc etc) and last the complicated nightmare of
> a workstation  (kde vs gnome vs etc etc).
>
> Of of the best features of Gentoo, is how easy maintaining and managing a
> server is. 99.999% of the issues with updates to gentoo, are related to
> the wide variety of packages available for workstations......?
> This approach could be used to build a basic installation with support for a
> wide variety of hardware, within a particular architecture. Then
> as the amount of installation packages are increase, logically break the
> installation across multiple (media) CDs. For example something like this
>
> Basic system             complete packaging            workstation
> kernel, baselayout...    <needs to be discussed>       X, kde, gnome,

This is something I disagree completely. Isn't the goal of Gentoo to
give you as much fine-grained as possible control on your system? If we
begin to create "generic" workstation,server etc. installs, we have to
do A LOT of assumptions on what is a workstation, server etc. for
people. What packages and what not. And you are sure that on a community
as idiosyncratic and addicted to fine-tuning like the Gentoo one, you
won't make very much people happy with your assumptions. How many of us,
for example, don't bother with KDE or Gnome completely and build a
Fluxbox or XFCE based workstation (Not me, but I know of many)?

To me the install must start from a minimal set of packages, just to
have a working system able to communicate with the world. From there,
it's the user that chooses. Heck, choosing packages and USE flags is the
fun part of a new Gentoo install. It's when that install becomes *your*
install.

> However, if installing gentoo, when asked, gives
> dozens of different answers, depending on a variety of asymmetrical,
> emotionally charged opinions, then the distro will  continue to
> languish, and be a reclusive club for experts, or those
> with very think skin (to which I belong <you pick>)....

Trust me, I'm not an expert nor someone with a thick skin. There's a lot
I don't like of Gentoo, paradoxically one of these things is the time I
have to dedicate to system administration (I know there's nothing I can
do about that, it's just sometimes I'd like to build a sysadmin clone of
myself that does maintaineance when I'm sleeping :) ). I'm not an IT
guy, I'm a biologist that uses his Gentoo machines as desktops and
workstation. And when I started, I was the classical newbie that used
Mandrake for a year. I also still use Kubuntu in my laboratory, because
there I need something that can be installed fast, works out of the box
and that I don't have to mess around later at all.

Simply, Gentoo gives you control and the tools for making this control
logical, if not easy. And has a documentation and community of the best
quality, that's one of the many things that keeps me stick to Gentoo.
Ubuntus are good,slick systems,I sincerely like them: but their
documentation is worse and their community is full of people that are
relatively clueless with respect to the Gentoo community. So much that
often if I have troubles with Kubuntu, the docs I end to read are Gentoo
docs.

"Installing gentoo, when asked", you know, has just one answer: The
Handbook. No dozens of different answers, no asymmetrical and
emotionally charged opinions. It's simple as that: Fire a suitable Linux
live cd and read the handbook.

You can't get much more strict than that.

> The greater Gentoo community should decide what is best for gentoo and
> the installation semantic is the most important piece of
> advertisment/marketing that the  Gentoo organization will ever
> devise, IMHO.

Having such a well done, step by step and detailed installation handbook
 is one of the best marketing tools of Gentoo, from my experience and
that of my friends. Is not that enough as installation semantic?

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list