don't forget the gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org if you want I can
put together some spec files that would build a universal cd for you.
I can understand chris's position. but it would be nice if he would
consider the development of a script for the livecd that could
extract the stage4 on it
I can understand chris's position. but it would be nice if he would
consider the development of a script for the livecd that could
extract the stage4 on it and include documentation in the handbook on
how to do it.
being done for next release. i'm assuming you meant stage3 here.
because as
partition limits are decided by the size of the drive and the other
partitions on it.
really that seems impossible. GLI told me I couldn't have a boot
partion smaller than ~50MB it complained about it. and I think I
remember it complaining less because I was able to continue ... about
having
Caleb Cushing wrote:
partition limits are decided by the size of the drive and the other
partitions on it.
really that seems impossible. GLI told me I couldn't have a boot
partion smaller than ~50MB it complained about it. and I think I
remember it complaining less because I was able to
As for the 20GB partition, I have no idea. Perhaps that's a limit imposed by
libparted, but it's not a limit that *I* put into the code.
don't remember much... it wasn't a limit. maybe that was when I tried
the gentoo suggested settings...
Patches are welcome.
I'd help but I'm no dev. sys
I know what unsupported means chris. what I'm referring to though are
bugs that would affect i686 as well. but possibly get closed because a
dev, like yourself, requested emerge --info and saw it was build on
i686 and closes it for that reason. probably RESOLVED WONTFIX .
On 10/11/06, Chris
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue,
10 Oct 2006 12:24:21 -0400:
There's a difference between support and ability. You will retain the
ability to install on i686 machines. We just don't want to support it.
This means we aren't going to be
Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:46:05 +0200:
A couple of years ago (when we were still using gcc-2.95 I used to run
gentoo on my server machine which was a pentium-60 (with fdiv bug). While
it took a while to compile the
I fear the idea that valid bugs may be closed do to a -march=i586.
release media should not have to be tuned to i386. perhaps thes older
machines shouldn't be a priority, but that doesn't mean they should
become completely unsupported. if a general move to i686 is desired
perhaps the archs should
On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 12:18 -0400, Caleb Cushing wrote:
I fear the idea that valid bugs may be closed do to a -march=i586.
If they're a bug dealing with an issue only present on i686, then yes,
they likely would be, at least for release media, unless you also
provide a patch. This is what
Peter Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 09
Oct 2006 23:57:54 +0200:
It was only a suggestion, not a decision. Of course, there are only a
little number of this early systems.
i686 would be really nice, i386 would be nice, too ;-)
Anybody doing Gentoo
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 11:13, Duncan wrote:
Personally, I'd say 686 is the lowest reasonable to support at this point.
Below that, try an appropriate binary distribution and save the days/weeks
of compiling. Of course, Gentoo is highly customizable, and folks could
try it on 386 if they
Am Tue, 10 Oct 2006 10:13:41 + (UTC)
schrieb Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Anybody doing Gentoo on even a Pentium original is going to be
compiling for awhile unless they do GRP only, and that's inadvised as
GRP isn't security updated until the next release, six months later!
Don't forget
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 10:13:41AM +, Duncan wrote:
Personally, I'd say 686 is the lowest reasonable to support at this point.
Below that, try an appropriate binary distribution and save the days/weeks
of compiling.
Bollocks. I run a print/samba/backup box at work which is a pentium II
Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 10 Oct
2006 11:19:46 +0100:
There are plently of people using VIA C3 class chips which are i586 in
their home servers because they are cheap, but more importantly very quiet
as they don't require CPU fans.
Good
Wernfried Haas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 10:13:41AM +, Duncan wrote:
Personally, I'd say 686 is the lowest reasonable to support at this point.
Below that, try an appropriate binary distribution and save the days/weeks
of compiling.
Bollocks. I run a print/samba/backup box at work
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 07:13:39AM -0500, Andrew Gaffney wrote:
Uhh, P2 is i686, which falls squarely into the realm of supported and
reasonable :)
Oh my goodness, i forgot to upgrade my cflags/chost/foo then when i
put the disk from the old pentium into this one then. Think of all
those
Duncan wrote:
Anybody doing Gentoo on even a Pentium original is going to be compiling
for awhile unless they do GRP only, and that's inadvised as GRP isn't
security updated until the next release, six months later! A couple years
ago when I first started with Gentoo and was on the main user
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 10:13 +, Duncan wrote:
Personally, I'd say 686 is the lowest reasonable to support at this point.
That's pretty much our target.
Below that, try an appropriate binary distribution and save the days/weeks
of compiling. Of course, Gentoo is highly customizable, and
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 12:52 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote:
Bollocks. I run a print/samba/backup box at work which is a pentium II
400. Compiling glibc takes 3 hours here and while it may not be the
snipping the rest since a Pentium 2 *is* i686
Which kind of support are you speaking of? As for
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 12:28:10PM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Which kind of support are you speaking of? As for installation media,
i really don't care. I fully agree i686 is dying out and if the
release media is built built for i686 only i have no problem with that
either. If you
21 matches
Mail list logo
