On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 17:49 +0100, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > I have no plans on releasing *any* kind of nightly *anything* so
> > long as Release Engineering still gets minimal testing from only a
> > *tiny* sub
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> I have no plans on releasing *any* kind of nightly *anything* so
> long as Release Engineering still gets minimal testing from only a
> *tiny* subset of our developer pool when we are basically *begging* for
> it.
I've been w
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 02:50 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
[snip]
> Remember, we switched from quarterly to bi-annual releases for a reason.
FYI.
This archived copy was from 2004
http://staff.osuosl.org/~cshields/gentoosurvey/#doc_chap8
We may wish to consider rerunning this survey annually to
Thibaut Fernagut wrote:
> It sure makes sense !
> You mean a web page with options per choise pointing to a section when
> that choise is made (consolidate existing install installs)
>
>
> example :
>
> Select the arch do you want to install gentoo on :
> [X]x86 []arm []x86_64
>
> --> go to u
On 3/3/07, Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Next time, read the documentation first.
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/list.xml
We've several quickstart/faq-type guides, and an alternate installation
howto. Man, I wish more developers would read the documentation, or at
least bother to get a g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Robbins wrote:
> I think that would be a more useful default view of the docs, but
> still doesn't quite get it perfect.
>
> Here is what I think would be ideal: One shorter Web page covering the
> installation process, with links to supplement
I think that would be a more useful default view of the docs, but
still doesn't quite get it perfect.
Here is what I think would be ideal: One shorter Web page covering the
installation process, with links to supplemental information that is
currently cluttering everything up. I don't need to rea
Daniel Robbins wrote:
And it should be one (web) page.
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?full=1
--
Kind Regards,
Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Daniel Robbins wrote:
> Yes, that was my request and I was told that this was the plan of
> attack, but the end result looked nothing like this.
>
> Just to be clear, I think the *official* documentation should be
> simple, with a linear path and non-intrusive links for non-standard
> stuff, and s
On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I asked for this approach back when the handbook was first created. It
was rejected by the docs team for being "too complicated to maintain".
Following Sven's (I think...) suggestion, I instead ported the quick
install guide (which is one page
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 01:34:36 -0700 "Daniel Robbins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/3/07, Denis Dupeyron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What do you think of a simplified handbook ? One that presents a lot
> > fewer choices to the user, in order to be less confusing.
>
> YES, it's needed. The hand
On 3/3/07, Denis Dupeyron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do you think of a simplified handbook ? One that presents a lot
fewer choices to the user, in order to be less confusing.
YES, it's needed. The handbook didn't turn out quite as I expected it
to. It should document a typical installation
Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On 3/3/07, Daniel Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Right now, installing Gentoo is a chore, and the many wonderful
>> choices of Gentoo end up making the install rather complicated. So I
>> definitely support ideas to help make our installation process
>> better/streaml
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 08:21 +0100, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> What do you think of a simplified handbook ? One that presents a lot
> fewer choices to the user, in order to be less confusing. I don't mean
> replacing the current handbook which is one great piece of work, but
> writing a "Gentoo in 10 e
On 3/3/07, Daniel Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Right now, installing Gentoo is a chore, and the many wonderful
choices of Gentoo end up making the install rather complicated. So I
definitely support ideas to help make our installation process
better/streamlined and less confusing. There are
On 3/1/07, Cory Visi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With Gentoo, once you are up and running, releases become very
unimportant. What do you think?
That's true, but ever wonder why so many people expend so much effort
to have easy-to-use installers? It turns out that if installation is a
pain, many
Cory Visi wrote:
> In addition, I don't see a huge drawback to using other distro's LiveCDs.
I tried to install a system with a marvell pata drive, no livecd I know
of managed to run because they couldn't find the cdrom. the system was
to be installed using debian and had windows installed, the d
Rémi Cardona wrote:
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
As opposed to minimal CDs, I would see weekly builds of stage3 tarballs
to be much more useful.
++ on that. Rebuilding _everything_ because openssl changed ABI since
the last stage3 install could save users a lot of time/trouble. (that
was just an e
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> As opposed to minimal CDs, I would see weekly builds of stage3 tarballs
> to be much more useful.
>
++ on that. Rebuilding _everything_ because openssl changed ABI since
the last stage3 install could save users a lot of time/trouble. (that
was just an example)
Weekly, b
> Simon Stelling wrote:
>> That being said, I think this is really up to the releng team and noone
>> else. They are doing the work, so we can discuss it far and wide, as
>> long as releng doesn't want to do it, nothing will happen. So maybe we
>> should wait for a statement from Chris before doing
Cory Visi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In addition, I don't see a huge drawback to using other distro's LiveCDs.
> Some distros specialize in making a LiveCD do everything possible, like
> Knoppix. This group isn't maintaining a portage tree, they are just making
> their LiveCD awesome. Why not
I just want to point out that I have gone through 4 years of
gcc/glibc/binutils/baselayout/udev/etc. updates on 8 production servers
with varying hardware _with the hardened profile_ and I've never had to
re-emerge world once.
In addition, I don't see a huge drawback to using other distro's Liv
Simon Stelling wrote:
That being said, I think this is really up to the releng team and noone
else. They are doing the work, so we can discuss it far and wide, as
long as releng doesn't want to do it, nothing will happen. So maybe we
should wait for a statement from Chris before doing anything el
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> This slightly more hardware support is almost always what new boxen need. Of
> course people can
> install Gentoo from another more up to date other distro, but wouldn't it be
> better if that were
> optional and not mandatory? That if people have new hardware whi
I personnally would like to see stage tarballs updated more frequently
if an arch receives a major update in system, like gcc or glibc, even
if this is only an r patch because these are a pain to install, and by
update I mean something new goes stable. Such releases are infrequent,
but make it pai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> Also, what's the point? Everything you use to install from the minimal
> is fetched from the internet. The only thing that an updated minimal
> would give us is a slightly more hardware support during the install.
This slightly
Hello everybody :)
I'd like to argue about this problem, since my point of view slightly
differs about this "problem".
I think that releasing installation media more often would make sense,
more than in the case of stages. I wrote a small article a few weeks ago,
about the "Small Gentoo" Liv
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 11:49:25AM +0100, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> I was wondering what is keeping us from releasing a minimal install cd more
> often than we do now.
> Isn't almost everything needed for it already in the stable tree and thus
> tested? And if so isn't
> it possible to ful
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
I was wondering what is keeping us from releasing a minimal install cd more
often than we do now.
Isn't almost everything needed for it already in the stable tree and thus
tested? And if so isn't
it possible to fully automate generation of these cd's?
Time and s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I was wondering what is keeping us from releasing a minimal install cd more
often than we do now.
Isn't almost everything needed for it already in the stable tree and thus
tested? And if so isn't
it possible to fully automate generation of these cd's
30 matches
Mail list logo
