Dave Nebinger wrote: >> A stage3 install has most of the benefits of a stage1 or stage2. >> Portage gives you the ability to rebuild *every* single package if you >> choose. > > > And like the binary distributions, it's targeted towards the generic > 386, not the pentium class machines we're all using (at least it was the > last time I checked, but it might have changed since then). >
Actually, the catalyst documentation states that an x86 stage1 is supposed to be targeted towards the generic 386. This makes it possible to derive more specialized stages (stage2 and stage3) from it. Normally, there is a specialized stage3 hosted on the mirrors for each major subarch (586, 686, athon, etc...). > So, like I said, it is just like using another binary distribution. Portage gives you the ability to rebuild *every* single package in a more flexible way than any binary distribution that I know of. > > And if you use a stage 3 and rebuild every package, it's not that > different than starting from a stage 1 or 2, is it? > Except that a stage3 is less error prone. Zac -- [email protected] mailing list
