On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 10:42:04AM -0600, MIkey wrote: > Why I explained a couple of posts further down. I could not duplicate the > problem either, I think it went away in 3.4.4-r1. I don't like posting bug > reports that I can't duplicate and I prefer to be able to either post a > patch or suggest a solution unless it is a trivial matter.
So you complain about a problem that is already fixed as if it still
exists? I really don't get it.
> Which promptly scrolled off of the screen a few days later, never again to
> be found unless you know to search for it or read through all of the forums
> before doing what the installation handbook describes.
As said at least 2 times before, why don't you file a bug report to
improve the docs then?
> And this is the primary point I am arguing. I keep hearing it, over and
> over. My testing leads me to a much different conclusion, I offered
> details describing why I reached my conclusions.
Your tests are - if i may say so - completely flawed. You disregard
the fact that the basic installation time of stage 3 is much lower
than the one of stage 1. Unpack the bugger, compile a kernel, that's
it. Not much trouble to be expected either - differently to stage 1.
Of course you may spend some time now recompiling stuff with your
favourite CFLAGS and upgrading gcc, but you can do that while your
system is already installed and fully productive (read: watching your
favourite movie or writing mails to gentoo-dev) instead of waiting for
stage 1 to finish. You don't even have to do it immedeately but
whenever you think it's a good time.
Furthermore problems with upgrading gcc after the install are most
likely easier to solve than a bailed out stage 1.
> It is the developers that
> decided to stop supporting the stage1 installation method, without asking
> users. I am asking you all to justify that decision, preferrably with
> facts.
Already been discussed a zillion times, please search the archives.
> I am claiming that that the stage1 installation method is in fact
> much easier, quicker, cleaner, and more dependable. I have still not heard
> a reasonable argument to refute that basic assertion. I have heard vague
> claims but no quantification.
It simply isn't, it's slower (see above) and more things can break.
If you want hard proof, go search bugzilla, but don't make us do it
for you.
I have to admit i often did stage 1 installs because i found it quite
funny and a good way to test new hardware. Fact is, stage 1 went away
for some reasons and we'll just have to get over it. If you really
care that much about Gentoo as you claim, accept the decisions of the
people behind the stages and try to help improving the supported stage
3 install.
cheers,
Wernfried
--
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org
IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org
pgpnUz8wyrbi6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
