| 1 |
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:26:23 +0400, Andrey Gerasimenko wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I do not see how it is hard to create a minimal installation CD image |
| 4 |
> every time new hardware support is added into the kernel, |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Then do it. Open source gives you the opportunity to make things happen |
| 7 |
yourself instead of whining that others won't do it. The build tools are |
| 8 |
in portage, so there's nothing stopping anyone from producing an updated |
| 9 |
minimal install CD, as has already been posted to the forums. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> or new gcc |
| 12 |
> version goes stable, or new portage version goes stable. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
These are irrelevant. As long as the CD boots, recognises your core |
| 15 |
hardware - which really comes down to disk controllers and network |
| 16 |
interfaces - and installs a working system, the rest can be updated |
| 17 |
post-install. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
A major GCC update is the exception to this rule, but that is precisely |
| 20 |
the sort of thing that needs extensive testing on a range of platforms |
| 21 |
rather than a rushed release. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Honk if you love peace and quiet. |
Archives