Re: [gentoo-user] which machine to buy for perfect gentoo machine?!
Am 13.04.2013 15:28, schrieb Tamer Higazi: The intel ones after it served me this 7 years well. However, I do not swear using intel, but I want to know if it makes sense or to buy a new intel cpu or it's only advertising in the cloud. I believe AMD is doing meanwhile stable cpu's as well, but from the technologie it is not only the number of cores for a stable gentoo system that counts ?! I think that this is not a question of what is better but rather: what fits your current situation. Intel CPUs are (when you compare CPUs of the same price range!) better at tasks where you don't need all cores/HT (most games, for example) and they run cooler due to their lower power consumption under load. While idle neither Intel, nor AMD is better than the other. That being said, AMD CPUs can perform extremely well when it comes to programs that utilize all cores. The point is not that Intel can't utilize all cores, too. The point is, that AMD CPUs within the same price range than Intel CPUs will tend to be faster when it comes to such programs (look at Crysis 3) or compiling. I can't find it at the moment but there was a test somewhere testing what happens when you run Video Encoding, compiling, etc... on AMD CPUs and the FX 8350 beat a much higher priced Intel CPU with ease. About stability: I don't have a problem with my i7 920 system, nor do I have a problem with my FX 8350 system. Both are rock solid and I never experienced a hardware related crash.
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 3.8 and external drivers
Am 12.03.2013 08:33, schrieb Yuri K. Shatroff: Again, following your logic, why not just let the user himself ./configure make make install as in old days? What is portage for? Following your logic, if there's even one tool to make life easier everything has to be absolutely easy. So we should now utilize fancy wizards? Once again, that's following your logic. That is a testing issue. Of course, one can never know what will change, or whether the code contains a bug (before one is detected), but when someone *does* stumble upon such issues, it is up to maintainers to update portage to prevent the issue... that's what portage is for, isn't it? That said, the topic starter has run across an issue and I assume the action to be taken by the package maintainer is to add a test against kernel compatibility and eligibility of the native driver, so that in the future the issue not rise again. Am I right? Or do I completely misunderstand the purpose of portage, and everything? First of all: Gentoo relies on volunteers to do work as testing. If something fails they CAN report it (like he did via this userlist). You're requesting enterprise features (everything tested to a great extent for every piece of hardware)? That's cool, because you can help. Just invest some time and help testing, everyone would be grateful. Without those reports portage can't know. It's a tool and not a thinking human being, as such it's limited in many ways. How should it know that something will break other things if nobody tells it? 4. How and why would you expect to force all users to grep thru kernel src in search for a driver they might need, especially when the portage explicitly lists this driver? Also sometimes kernel drivers' description is not quite consistent and it is not easy to figure out whether it supports exactly yours card/chip/device, or moreover find it by grep. All kernel source? grep? Nope. Just reading a bit of help text. Maybe using google. Doing it once. As I said, there is not always good help text for kernel options. I tend to agree but then again: why even bother compiling the Linux kernel if it's too tedious? Then you have a working setup you can use for the rest of eternity (or the next couple of years...) Okay, and when someone like the topic starter *did* have a working setup with the superfluous driver from portage, ... do you feel the logic? :) When should one realize that this setup is no more working? I guess, just after it stopped working, right? :) Of course, again, if one is really concerned he will check each kernel release or whatever for the new stuff he's concerned about, but when all *worked*, why should he? There are distributions out there who take care of *this*. Instead of utilizing them you're trying to redefine Gentoo in a manner that more suits you. This is highly illogical, as alternatives are out there with the exact same thing you'd like to see. so, according to that, everyone who's striving to get linux/gentoo/whtever more user-friendly (including portage's key features) is an ubuntoid? You know, I came from FreeBSD where you're supposed to do much more work by hand, and after a dozen years I'm a little bit tired of that. I *can* do without things like portage's colorful output, for example (although it's helpful most of the time). But I really dislike things broken e.g. on `portupgrade -aR` and the sort and I can *not* call a system which allows that a quality system. That sort of user-friendliness has nothing to do with ubuntism (we know better what you want) and visual beauty: that's about quality. (I know that there's no absolute quality, but when a system tends to fail, and justifies that with user not having googled or having taken a way we, devs, didn't ever think to go -- it's at least incorrect if not arrogant.) You're mixing up Linux and distributions. Linux is a kernel, not more, not less. If the distribution is user friendly or not is defined for every single distribution. The problem I see here: you want Gentoo to do certain things for you which is in direct conflict to Gentoo's principles. Gentoo really was never meant for the beginner, nor was it meant for the expert who just wants to USE things and SOMETIMES change crucial parts of the system. In my personal opinion it's highly arrogant to download a distribution, seeing that you obviously don't like it (which is absolutely fine) and then jump on the mailing list. Patronizing everyone and telling them how that system should exactly change that it's acceptable in your eyes. But, that's the whole beauty of open source: you can do things exactly your way by forking, helping as a dev/tester, developing your own things if you hate them, etc... And before you tell me: you want to troll me. Nope, I'm dead serious. Open source is all about getting involved if you want to change things. Other certain operating systems don't even give you that
Re: [gentoo-user] kernel 3.8 and external drivers
Am 12.03.2013 11:01, schrieb Yuri K. Shatroff: On 12.03.2013 12:46, Alexander Schwarz wrote: Am 12.03.2013 08:33, schrieb Yuri K. Shatroff: Again, following your logic, why not just let the user himself ./configure make make install as in old days? What is portage for? Following your logic, if there's even one tool to make life easier everything has to be absolutely easy. So we should now utilize fancy wizards? Once again, that's following your logic. not has to be easy, but definitely, with such purpose. Do you disagree? Perhaps you reckon that the whole purpose of computing is to make life harder? :) Ok, I know that comparisons are sometimes silly and known to not work at times, but here is what I think is currently happening: There's a long street with various bars. One of them is named Ubuntu, another is called Fedora and there's a much smaller bar called Gentoo. Every bar has a sign in front, telling everyone what to expect. The sign in front of the bar Ubuntu states: free drinks, served by people, brought to you. On the other hand we only serve 3 different drinks. The sign before the bar Gentoo states: please mix your drinks as you like, we're not going to serve them to you, we only provide the ingredients for free. Now, most people gather in the bar Ubuntu because it does exactly what they want: free drinks, nicely served, no worries. But there's also a smaller group that prefers exotic drinks, they want to mix freely. So they visit Gentoo for years. One day somebody walks in: oh, uhm, nice bar but why do I have to mix drinks myself? The people in that bar (Gentoo) reply kindly: well, we like it that way, because we want to make sure that those drinks only contain what we want in them. The stranger replies: Well, here are just few people, you shouldn't mix your own drinks. I think it should be much easier than that. The guests kindly reply: Yeah, we totally understand that, but why don't you just go to that other bar, called Ubuntu? It does EXACTLY what you want, no worries. The stranger replies: No, you must change, because you need more guests. The guests reply again: Yes, but this bar was exactly made this way as we like it. It's our place where we are happy. If you turned it into a second Ubuntu then we would have no home anymore. To put it blunt and simple: you're asking a distribution to change because you don't like it. Your point is that things don't have to stay like they are forever. That is probably a very good point but it rises the question: if every single distribution is easy mode, what's left for all the people who're more into doing stuff the hard way? If Gentoo was the only distribution you would have a really really good point and I would jump on your side in a second, as I'm a fan of make it easy for the average user, too. But there's so much choice out there that doesn't cost you a penny. So there's simply no need for Gentoo to become easy mode, because there are other distributions filling that spot quite easily. Sorry I didn't get what you meant by *this*. All I'm trying to say is that every software is for the user, and blaming user for software deficiencies is unfair. I regard the case in question as a deficiency. Would you disagree? I can't find a basis to think the opposite, but if you can, I'd be interested. :) I stated it above: Gentoo is filling a niche. It's exactly aimed towards people who like to tinker, figure stuff out and tailor a system to their likings. Every decision you take away from the user makes it easier for the user but in turn limits your capabilities to change a system to your likings. So, there's quite a logical reason if you stop seeing Gentoo as the distribution of choice for the average user. I'm mixing up as long as both linux and gentoo and other software are software which all serve one purpose: to solve user's tasks. And as for me, all principles are the consequences of this, and not the opposite. I don't like the way of personification you resort to (including your opinion of what I do or want which can not be correct), but personally, even not being a beginner, I do not expect things to break every now and then. Probably that's why I'm using Gentoo: because the breakage probability in it (if used properly) is less than in some other distro which is not under one's control. I suppose, most users don't care what for Gentoo was meant, why it fares the way it fares: users care for the way it suits their needs. As for me, saying if this or that don't work, you guys must know that this distro wasn't meant for working right... is like you are too stupid to use it or even more humiliating. Most users don't even care for Gentoo because the installation process is complicated (the documentation is great, however). See Gentoo as a distribution for mechanics, while Ubuntu is a car that works for everyone. Once again: you want to turn Gentoo into something it is not. All
