Jackass! 2005.2 Development [ ok ]

[brettlegree]

The install scripts are also helpful in saving time at keyboard.

You mean that it saves time compared to a Stage 1/3 install, right? Are we comaring apples and oranges? With Jackass! the compiling is already done.

I've looked over the Conrad GCC 3.4.4 "scripts" that I found on the bfgraphics.net website, and the two scripts comprise nothing short of a blatant transcription of the Stage 1/3 Guide. Even the system config files have been "borrowed."

(snip)

Without having to go into excruciating detail, the entire "improved" Conrad installation method for GCC 3.4.4 is nothing but a scripted transcription of the Stage 1/3 Guide. Anybody could have done the exact same thing by just cutting and pasting all of the commands out of the Guide and putting them into a big one-liner. That's exactly what Kimchi_sg did quite some time ago in contributing to the Stage 1/3 thread, and exactly what these guys have done in writing their script. I mean, the config files are the same, the CFLAGS are "borrowed", and every toolkit building step used in the Stage 1/3 Guide is parroted in the Conrad method. They even pruned GCC 3.3.x and emerged the exact same packages in the same order that they're emerged in the Stage 1/3 Guide!

I guess that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but if someobdy's just going to take the Stage 1/3 Guide and script it line for line, they could at least be courteous enough to give credit to the original author instead of trying to pass-off somebody else's work as their own. I hope that failure to give credit where credit is due was just an oversight, and that they weren't trying to pass my Guide off as if it were their own creation.

What part of this stuff is original?

(snip)

Not only is it not original, but something about the scripts seem amiss if you compare with the Stage 1/3 guide - so I'm not sure I would completely trust it to work properly. I might try the gcc 4.0.x & reiser4 out of curiosity - but via the Stage 1/3 guide...

Regardless, I look forward to helping out with Jackass! 2005.2 however I can.

Brett

[cheater1034]

Edit: trying to figure out this GCC 4.02 stuff. Cheater1034 had deprecated his GCC 4.02 tarball in favor of a Stage 1/3 GCC 3.4.4 tarball in this post. i guess something must have changed if he's now using GCC 4.02 in Conrad. is anybody up on this?

Actually the GCC 3.4.4 AND 4.0.2 tarball are not supported by conrad in any way anymore.

However, in future CONRAD Projects Development, I will be making new GCC 4.0.2 Stage3 - 1/3 - For a few different supported architectures.

More information will be on the CONRAD Website - Almost done - I will edit this post or make a new post with the website after I upload it.

BobP, I've loved for Jackass! project for quite some time now, good work.

But shouldn't you wait for 2005.2 from Gentoo? Or instead of calling it 2005.2, making it updated 2005.1, (eg: 2005.1-1, or something of the like)
------
For any questions on GCC 4 - you could always ask me, I'm glad to answer any questions if any.

[Bob P]

Actually the GCC 3.4.4 AND 4.0.2 tarball are not supported by conrad in any way anymore.

However, in future CONRAD Projects Development, I will be making new GCC 4.0.2 Stage3 - 1/3 - For a few different supported architectures.

its not a question of whether or not you're continuing to support GCC 3.4.4 and those scripts. the point is that you're taking MY WORK, putting your name on it, and trying to pass it off as if it were your own. brother, that's just wrong. taking that stuff without acknowledging who you've copied it from is just plain stealing -- nothing less.

i think that it is only fair for you to give me credit for MY WORK that you've copied. that goes for BOTH the GCC 3.4.4-derived stuff, and for any other Stage 1/3-derived stuff that may follow.

In stark constrast, Chris Smart of Kororaa was gentleman enough to give me acknowledgement in the credits for his project that is based on my work. Its a shame that you haven't been willing to do the same.

i would appreciate, at an absolute minimum, an acknowledgement that your work is derived from mine and a hyperlink to my Stage 1/3 web page:

http://bobp.webhop.org

[johngalt]

But shouldn't you wait for 2005.2 from Gentoo? Or instead of calling it 2005.2, making it updated 2005.1, (eg: 2005.1-1, or something of the like)
------
For any questions on GCC 4 - you could always ask me, I'm glad to answer any questions if any.

... if we're still coinciding with Gentoo releases, we're definitely early, which will be a good thing. I haven't heard anything about Gentoo's 2005.2--far as I'm concerned, releng-- needs to do better QA & checking this time around. They should delay 2005.2 until they're sure there won't be things like permissions issues et al. Heck, I don't even know if there will be 2005.2--though with all the baselayout changes and so on, it wouldn't be a bad idea.

well, i guess the fact that i'm thinking about a maintenance build when Gentoo isn't planning on another release means that we're not going to be coinciding with a Gentoo release this time around. in some respects, i think its a good idea NOT to coincide with Gentoo releases. i like to address a need to build something when something needs to be built, and not to be constrained by a need to coincide with a Gentoo release.

when Gentoo 2005.1 came out, not one day had passed before people started clamoring for a Jackass! 2005.1 release. those people who expected a Jackass! 2005.1 build to be introduced at the same time as the Gentoo 2005.1 release had no clue whatsoever about the logistical requirements. from a practical standpoint, its just not possible to build an entire system like Jackass! within 24 hours of the Gentoo update being made available. some people's expectations were very unrealistic.

further complicating the issue of coincident releases was the fact that the Gentoo 2005.1 tarballs were released with some pretty serious permission problems. sure, they weren't insurmountable, but they were a real PITA to work through on the first day when no workarounds had been posted and i was trying to rush to deploy a Gentoo-derived toolkit in reponse to urgent demand. i finally decided to give up on the Gentoo 2005.1 tarballs, and i chose to base Jackass! 2005.1 on Jackass! 2005.0 instead.

as it stands now, Jackass! is derived from previous releases of Jackass!, not from concurrent releases of Gentoo. since I don't build Jackass! off of Gentoo tarballs, I don't see any real need to provide concordant enumeration of the releases. besides, not having to coordinate Jackass! releases with Gentoo releases means that Jackass! can respond to situations when Jackass! needs to, and avoid being constrained by trying to shadow Gentoo's movements. You can't be on the cutting edge if you're a follower.

on another note, i get confused by projects that shadow the Gentoo release numbers. Kororaa, for example, had its first release come out as 2005.1. i guess that this was because it was built off of either Gentoo 2005.1 or Jackass! 2005.1. either way, i found it confusing to see a project start off with a 2005.1 release instead of a 2005.0 release.

at this point i don't know if Gentoo is planning a 2005.2 release or not. as its November already, i'd expect that they would avoid a late term release like 2005.2 and focus on 2006.0. if that's indeed the case, there shouldn't be any version number confusion between Jackass! 2005.2 and any version of Gentoo.

Makes for a good read, and an explanation why the numbering scheme is coincidentally the same as the Gentoo official releases but in fact have ***nothing*** to do with them.

[brettlegree]

Actually the GCC 3.4.4 AND 4.0.2 tarball are not supported by conrad in any way anymore.

However, in future CONRAD Projects Development, I will be making new GCC 4.0.2 Stage3 - 1/3 - For a few different supported architectures.

its not a question of whether or not you're continuing to support GCC 3.4.4 and those scripts. the point is that you're taking MY WORK, putting your name on it, and trying to pass it off as if it were your own. brother, that's just wrong. taking that stuff without acknowledging who you've copied it from is just plain stealing -- nothing less.

i think that it is only fair for you to give me credit for MY WORK that you've copied. that goes for BOTH the GCC 3.4.4-derived stuff, and for any other Stage 1/3-derived stuff that may follow.

In stark constrast, Chris Smart of Kororaa was gentleman enough to give me acknowledgement in the credits for his project that is based on my work. Its a shame that you haven't been willing to do the same.

i would appreciate, at an absolute minimum, an acknowledgement that your work is derived from mine and a hyperlink to my Stage 1/3 web page:

http://bobp.webhop.org

Just wanted to back Bob up on this one - if I can be so bold as to speak for more than just myself - I think that we know from experience that Jackass! and Stage 1/3 work, the documents make sense, and Bob is a very approachable person - it is plainly obvious that a lot of work went into these projects.

Nothing wrong with building on someone's work but perhaps a nod in the direction of the creator of said work is a good idea

[cheater1034]

i would appreciate, at an absolute minimum, an acknowledgement that your work is derived from mine and a hyperlink to my Stage 1/3 web page:
http://bobp.webhop.org[/color][/b]

What would you like acknowledgement on? I don't support GCC 3.4.4 anymore, the GCC344 install scripts are on the mirror, but not supported in any way.

Do you want me to say, Stage1/3 Method by BobP? I think it is a completely different concept, conrad came into the picture to be an installation method, with bash scripts to upgrade the compiler and acquire the stage3/chroot, etc. In order to help guide the process of installing gentoo with a new compiler.

Most people who do compiler upgrades, first of all emerge a new toolkit, conrad happens to use (GCC 4.0.2, Binutils 2.16.x, Glibc-2.3.5.20050722 (for gcc4)

It is an entirely different toolkit, and isn't even the same concept as jackass.
-----
Jackass is for a stable bulletproof system with GCC 3.4.4, a very stable compiler, it also consists of very different CFLAGS, Conrad uses way more stable and less optimized compile flags (for GCC4)

Conrad uses bash scripts on the install, it currently supports 7 archs - It uses a whole new version of the GCC compiler, it is based from the newest (4.0) Jackass is based on the stable (3.4) - Conrad also has glibc-2.3.5.20050722 - It is the newest ebuild, it only builds with GCC4, and unlike jackass, it also uses Binutils 2.16.1
-----
I don't understand what your getting at.
Jackass = Install Guide - Reiserfs, gcc 3.4.4, glibc-2.3.5-rX, binutils 2.15.x, Stable Kernel (gentoo-sources) all done manually
Conrad = Install Guide - Reiser4, GCC 4.0.2, glibc-2.3.5.20050722, binutils 2.16.x, Custom patchset or patched gentoo sources (archck-sources), stage3/snapshot done through scripts, GCC upgrade/new toolkit is also all done through 1 bash script, for the compiler in conrad, you don't need to do anything, run the second script, and you have a rebuild world, and GCC 4.0.x is the only compiler on the system

And in the conrad install, you don't even use the gentoo minimal installation cd, you use the conrad one, which supports reiser4.
-----
To my understanding, I don't view myself as wrong, Conrad is an entirely different concept from jackass.

Also conrad is not just an install method, but a series of projects, all supporting the reiser4 filesystem, and gcc 4.0.2.
And conrad is going to add an amd64 install option on 0.5.1 (guide), and 0.2 (install livecd)

it is very unclear on what you want recognition on, as it is an entirely different cd booted, filesystem, toolkit, and make.conf, the conrad guide also supports fbsplash by default.
-----
BobP, I respect jackass, but why would I put your name on my bash scripts that do a basic compiler upgrade, and re-merge all the system packages with the new compiler, which is also totally different from what your guide is.

The standard GCC upgrade is not copyrighted by you, it is very common for people to upgrade their compilers, and they all use the same concept, emerge the toolkit, and emerge --emptytree world

So conrad is not YOUR WORK - It is far from it, anyone and everyone can do a gcc upgrade, I happen to use an entirely different method and concept for doing this, and the supported toolkit is entirely different.

[cheater1034]

i would appreciate, at an absolute minimum, an acknowledgement that your work is derived from mine and a hyperlink to my Stage 1/3 web page:
http://bobp.webhop.org[/color][/b]

What would you like acknowledgement on? I don't support GCC 3.4.4 anymore, the GCC344 install scripts are on the mirror, but not supported in any way.

Do you want me to say, Stage1/3 Method by BobP? I think it is a completely different concept, conrad came into the picture to be an installation method, with bash scripts to upgrade the compiler and acquire the stage3/chroot, etc. In order to help guide the process of installing gentoo with a new compiler.

Most people who do compiler upgrades, first of all emerge a new toolkit, conrad happens to use (GCC 4.0.2, Binutils 2.16.x, Glibc-2.3.5.20050722 (for gcc4)

It is an entirely different toolkit, and isn't even the same concept as jackass.
-----
Jackass is for a stable bulletproof system with GCC 3.4.4, a very stable compiler, it also consists of very different CFLAGS, Conrad uses way more stable and less optimized compile flags (for GCC4)

Conrad uses bash scripts on the install, it currently supports 7 archs - It uses a whole new version of the GCC compiler, it is based from the newest (4.0) Jackass is based on the stable (3.4) - Conrad also has glibc-2.3.5.20050722 - It is the newest ebuild, it only builds with GCC4, and unlike jackass, it also uses Binutils 2.16.1
-----
I don't understand what your getting at.
Jackass = Install Guide - Reiserfs, gcc 3.4.4, glibc-2.3.5-rX, binutils 2.15.x, Stable Kernel (gentoo-sources) all done manually
Conrad = Install Guide - Reiser4, GCC 4.0.2, glibc-2.3.5.20050722, binutils 2.16.x, Custom patchset or patched gentoo sources (archck-sources), stage3/snapshot done through scripts, GCC upgrade/new toolkit is also all done through 1 bash script, for the compiler in conrad, you don't need to do anything, run the second script, and you have a rebuild world, and GCC 4.0.x is the only compiler on the system

And in the conrad install, you don't even use the gentoo minimal installation cd, you use the conrad one, which supports reiser4.
-----
To my understanding, I don't view myself as wrong, Conrad is an entirely different concept from jackass.

Also conrad is not just an install method, but a series of projects, all supporting the reiser4 filesystem, and gcc 4.0.2.
And conrad is going to add an amd64 install option on 0.5.1 (guide), and 0.2 (install livecd)

it is very unclear on what you want recognition on, as it is an entirely different cd booted, filesystem, toolkit, and make.conf, the conrad guide also supports fbsplash by default.
-----
BobP, I respect jackass, but why would I put your name on my bash scripts that do a basic compiler upgrade, and re-merge all the system packages with the new compiler, which is also totally different from what your guide is.

The standard GCC upgrade is not copyrighted by you, it is very common for people to upgrade their compilers, and they all use the same concept, emerge the toolkit, and emerge --emptytree world

So conrad is not YOUR WORK - It is far from it, anyone and everyone can do a gcc upgrade, I happen to use an entirely different method and concept for doing this, and the supported toolkit is entirely different.

Perhaps, if you knew what conrad was you wouldn't assume it is a replica of jackass, because jackass is nothing more than an installation guide that tells you how to upgrade the compiler - Maybe read the conrad guide? look over the scripts, make.conf files, package.keywords/unmask?

[johngalt]

The issue here is not whether you support GCC3.4.4 or not. The issue is that the original method you used to create Conrad derived *heavily* from the Stage 1/3 install. To say that the GCC 344 scripts are unsupported is irrelevant - you started the project deriving it from someone else's work and never gave so much as a *thank's to Bob for the original concept / commands / etc.*

Let me give you an idea - from M$ no less:

Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Distributed under a licensing agreement with Spyglass, Inc.
Contains security software licensed from RSA Data Security Inc.
Portions of this software are based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group.
Multimedia software components, including Indeo(R); video, Indeo(R) audio, and Web Design Effects are provided by Intel Corp.
Unix version contains software licensed from Mainsoft Corporation. Copyright (c) 1998-1999 Mainsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Mainsoft is a trademark of Mainsoft Corporation.
Warning: This computer program is protected by copyright law and international treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this program, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.

[hpestilence]

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-27 ... ethod.html

I think that link is the original put together howto for a stage1 install with a stage3 tarball. At the bottom of the post are acknowledgements for various authors/contributors of other install guides such as the "The Developers Method" Stage1 with ntpl> that helped BobP create his guide. Basically when you created your "CONRAD" install method you should of mentioned your predecessors and if anyone builds off "CONRAD" then they should mention you.

When I decided to install linux for the first time in my life I decided to go with gentoo and I used BobP's post to help me with some problems that the handbook didn't cover. So props to you BobP

[carpman]

Hello Bob, thought the whole process was familier

Well if he has lifted your work without credit then using his scripts as basis for future Jackass should not be an issue.

As for the scripts saving time, well i just ran the first script and went out, it downloaded stage, portage snapshot and eneterd chroot, during this time i got on with other things.

From the look of it he does not do as much testing as you so don't is being as stable, i am trying it as i want to see what reiser4 and GCC4 hold for the future.

[dellaxim]

Is this thread turning to a fire or a Jackass Development thread.
Please people for the future of Jackass stick to the original purpose of the thread.

[Monkeh]

Bob, I never received a reply to the email I sent you. Now you've got a lot more compiling to do, I'd like to offer my machines services again

[loki99]

Is this thread turning to a fire or a Jackass Development thread.
Please people for the future of Jackass stick to the original purpose of the thread.

Well, Bob P started the whole thing.

I guess that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but if someobdy's just going to take the Stage 1/3 Guide and script it line for line, they could at least be courteous enough to give credit to the original author instead of trying to pass-off somebody else's work as their own. I hope that failure to give credit where credit is due was just an oversight, and that they weren't trying to pass my Guide off as if it were their own creation.

Rebuilding your toolchain with an updated compiler, surely was not invented by Bob P.

[Bob P]

so tell me, cheater1034 -- is the reason that i can't access your site because you've blocked access from my IP address with your firewall, or is the site just down?

http://bfgraphics.net/conrad

i can't imagine why you wouldn't want me looking at what you're posting for everyone else to see.

[Visceral]

so tell me, cheater1034 -- is the reason that i can't access your site because you've blocked access from my IP address with your firewall, or is the site just down?

http://bfgraphics.net/conrad

i can't imagine why you wouldn't want me looking at what you're posting for everyone else to see.

*Hands Bob a tinfoil hat.*

In my experience with projects like this, when flame wars over where credit is due break out, ALL projects suffer. Suffice to say I think everyone has stated their positions and should move on. Turning this into some kind of Gentoo holy war doesnt help anyone.

[cheater1034]

so tell me, cheater1034 -- is the reason that i can't access your site because you've blocked access from my IP address with your firewall, or is the site just down?

http://bfgraphics.net/conrad

i can't imagine why you wouldn't want me looking at what you're posting for everyone else to see.

The conrad website is not up yet, as I stated.

The mirror for install method 0.5.0 is curently: http://www.bfgraphics.net/conrad/0.5.0/
The LiveCD mirror is currently: http://www.bfgraphics.net/conrad/releases/
The supported kernel ebuilds are: http://www.bfgraphics.net/conrad/LINUX/
The installer directory is: http://www.bfgraphics.net/conrad/0.1_Install
-----
There are gcc 3.4.4 scripts, but they are on, bfgraphics.net/conrad/ARCH | First and foremost tons of people upgrade to gcc 3.4.4, they don't have to follow your guide to do it, second of all, that is completely depreceated, and is in no way supported by conrad, if you would feel more comfortbale, I'd delete them, or move them to a deprecated directory.

I believe it is totally unnecessary for me to give you credit for all the hard work I put into creating a guide with bash scripts, reiser4, and everything else.

It completely differs from yours, I spent hard time building a reiser4 install livecd - So I worked hard on this project, making seperate make.confs, and scripts for 7 archs, for the Conrad Method.

I'm one guy, so far doing tons of work on this, and the only similarity between conrad and your guide is one thing:
They both will get you a gentoo system with a new compiler.

Conrad has totally different concepts, and a completely different toolkit, as far as I'm concerned, my install method is, gcc4, binutils 2.16, glibc-2.3.5.20050722, reiser4, archck or acid sources, different make.conf, bash scripts to get the stage3/portage snapshot, and to upgrade the compiler and rebuild the system.
-----
I am not blocking your ip, as that would be pointless - The conrad mirrors are posted above.

Bob, you can't expect me to put your name on the conrad install method, expecially when I worked VERY hard on it, and have done a lot of work and a lot of testing, I made 4 sets of scripts, I thoroughly tested them, then came to the conclusion on the ones that worked best and fastest. And those are the ones you see on the mirror in the 0.5.0 directory.

I even created my install livecd for the guide, I experimented with several make.confs (built the system multiple times with different make.conf files) I discovered it is fastest, and best to use stable CFLAGS for GCC 4.0.2 - And I only put what tested the best in the conrad guide, the conrad toolkit, filesystem, and make.conf are completely different from your guide, and I use bash scripts to make it a smoother installation - None of these concepts are derived from the jackass guide.

[Bob P]

Based on your multiple long posts, it looks like you're spending an awful lot of time rationalizing why you've done what you've done. I guess you feel a need to explain your actions.

Based on your postcount it looks like you may not have spent an awful lot of time on the board, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you may not understand that the norm in the Gentoo community is to acknowledge people when you base a derivative work on their work. Giving somebody credit in the form of a footnote its not asking much, and its a common courtesy that every well-mannered developer obeys as part of the unwritten Code of Honor. Oh wait a minute -- its not an unwritten code of honor -- its something that is specifically required by the Creative Commons Share-Alike Attribution License -- the very license upon which all Gentoo documentation is based.

Giving credit where credit was due is exactly what i did when i gave credits to a number of people when i developed the first Stage 1/3 install:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-274968.html

14. Acknowledgements

Special thanks to kimchi_sg for his many comments that have helped to refine this Guide and for all of his help in the support thread.

Special thanks go to ali3nx for his helpful tutorial on building a Gentoo Stage 1 system using NPTL.

Special thanks also go to rac for sharing with us the great idea of building Stage 1 Gentoo installations using a Stage 3 tarball.

Thanks to the following people who have contributed to my understanding of Gentoo and helped me solve problems as I was learning my way around: hardcore, NeddySeagoon

The following people's comments on the Gentoo Forums on related threads have also contributed indirectly in the writing of this Installation Guide. Their names are listed in alphabetical order: heilvc, Hobbit-HK, irf2003, kimchi_sg, Oktane

My sincere apologies if I've left anyone out!

When i wrote the first draft of the Guide, i gave credit to every single person who's post i read on the Gentoo Forums and who's code snippet went into the original version of the install. some of those people like oktane didn't even realize what they might have done to merit an acknowledgement as a contributor, and they were taken completely off-guard by having been listed as a contributor.

That's how its supposed to work. Everyone working on Gentoo is supposed to make what contribution they can, while giving credit to others that have gone before them. That's what the entire concept of the Creative Commons Share-Alike Attribution license, upon which all Gentoo documentation is based, is all about. Oh yes, just in case you weren't aware -- the PDF version of the Stage 1/3 Guide does contain a Copyright notice. Before anyone complains about it, look at it closely. Astute readers will recognize that it is a Creative Commons license!

By acknowledging the other people who's work you're building upon, you could foster a sense of collegial creative competition, where everyone works together to try to make Gentoo better. Someone creates something that's good, and they raise the standards for Gentoo. Someone else comes along with a good idea, works on it, and raises the bar for the next person. In an optimal situation, multiple people acknowledge each others work, and they all try to out-contribute one another. That's how Community-Based development is supposed to work.

Chris Smart is a good example of this in what he did with Kororaa. He built something great that was based on the Stage 1/3 Guide. He mentioned my name as a footnote on his page, with a link to the Stage 1/3 pages, mentioning that his project was an off-shoot of the Stage 1/3 install. THAT is how its supposed to work. Nobody's asking you to give me authorship credit on your Conrad project. I'm just asking that you do what everyone else who develops in the Gentoo community does as a common courtesy -- mention the person who's work was used as a starting point for your project. Its a common courtesy that EVERYONE in the Gentoo community lives by, EXCEPT YOU. Given that your scripts and your config files amounted to a verbatim reproduction of the steps in the Stage 1/3 Install Guide, recognition seems warranted. But that's not what's important -- there's a bigger picture to look at.

To put this in perspective, yes, the Stage 1/3 Guide is copyrighted. Why? Because to release a document under the Creative Commons licenses that are used by Gentoo, you have to first copyright the work. Until you copyright a work, you have no right to assign any sort of distribution license to it, whether it be GPL, Creative Commons or whatever. That's a part of the legalese that an awful lot of people in the Linux community just don't understand. To release anything via the GPL, you MUST first copyright it, to assert your rights to release it. Informed people know that copyrights aren't bad. They're just a necessary tool that's required to make things happen. If you have any doubts about copyrighting, look at the bottom of any page on the Gentoo site and you'll see the Gentoo copyright notices:

Copyright 2001-2005 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Designed by Kyle Manna © 2003; Style derived from original subSilver theme. Powered by phpBB 2.0.18-gentoo-p1 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Sharpening the focus on the perspective then, what you've done is you've violated the most basic principle upon which Gentoo is founded -- freely sharing information and giving credit to people who deserve credit. That's MANDATED by the Creative Commons license. You've violated it.

I was hoping that I could write this off as a major lack of understanding about how Gentoo is supposed to work on your part. At any rate, you've answered my question about whether or not my name was omitted intentionally or inadvertently. You've decided that you're going to take my work and assimilate it into your project without even mentioning my contribution in passing. You should be ashamed of yourself.

As far as I'm concerned, we can consider this topic closed. I don't need any more 10-paragraph rationalizations on Conrad in the Jackass! threads. They just divert from what I'm trying to accomplish here.

[cheater1034]

Bob P,

I understand what your getting at - but you certainly are mistaken - upgrading the gcc compiler is certainly not Your idea - several people build new compilers by doing the same thing and rebuilding the world.

Conrad is not derived in any way shape or form from jackass, it is a completely different concept, and you are being unclear. And 10-paragraph posts, I think the only 10-paragraph post was by you just before this.

It is not a stage 1/3 Install, it's a stage3 installation, then after you boot your system, you run the second conrad install script, whcih does basic things, such as emerge sync, build a new toolkit, make gcc 4.0.2 the default, rebuild the toolkit with gcc4, then rebuild the world with the new compiler, and emerge additional system packages. Your guide is completely different and is done from a chroot, my guide gets a bootable default stage3 system, then you reboot into it, then following that you run the GCC 4.0 script from the conrad mirror.
------
If you feel this is the same thing as a stage1/3 installation, tell me further - As far as I'm concerned it's a regular stage3 install, then after kernel,grub, and other minor configuration steps, you boot the system - Then run the conrad second gcc 4.0 script, which upgrades the compiler and rebuilds the world (this is not a stage1/3 installation - nor does it use any of the same packages or concepts in jackass)

[Bob P]

If you feel this is the same thing as a stage1/3 installation, tell me further -

like i said, this isn't worth any further attention. the Good Citizen speech clearly went over your head, so i'll leave it at that. but anyone who can read can look at the code of the Stage 1/3 install and compare it to the code of your scripts can see that there is a 1-to-1 correspondence between the steps, where your scripts parroted the Stage 1/3 Guide in its exact sequence.

sure, the idea of building an upgraded toolkit is not unique. but the way i built the Stage 1/3 toolkit is totally unique -- i did something in an extremely convoluted series of steps that was so unique that it had never been done before. everyone recognizes it for what it is, and nobody is foolish enough to think that it is a coincidence when the exact sequence of events shows up in "your" work. saying that your GCC 4.0.2 version is different and that the GCC 3.4.4 version is deprecated isn't a viable excuse. saying that you stole the old version of your scripts and not the new ones doesn't change the fact that your GCC 3.4.4 scripts are a carbon copy rip-off of my work that you've unsuccessfully tried to pass-off as if it were your own. that would be like me saying that i'm not responsible for stealing the car i stole last week because i'm no longer driving it. its clear that you're going to deny, deny, deny responsibility for what you've done, but anyone who looks at the Stage 1/3 guide and compares it, line-for-line, to your scripts, will see the scripts for what they are. no amount of hand-waving can change the facts -- the code is copied.

i'll agree to disagree with you on this. there's no point in me spending any more of my time casting of pearls before you. please, take an opportunity to briefly write the last word on this if you feel that you must, and move on.

[cheater1034]

The packages in the conrad toolkit are completely different than yours - first off

The way it's done in the conrad scripts is <taken from gcc 4 part2 script>
rm /etc/make.conf
wget http://bfgraphics.net/conrad/0.5.0/athl ... ake.conf-1
mv make.conf-1 /etc/make.conf
mkdir -p /var/log/portage
mkdir -p /usr/local/portage
rm /etc/portage/package.keywords
wget http://bfgraphics.net/conrad/gcc4/package.keywords
wget http://bfgraphics.net/conrad/gcc4/package.unmask
mv package.unmask /etc/portage
mv package.keywords /etc/portage
emerge sync
echo sys-devel/libperl ithreads >> /etc/portage/package.use
echo dev-lang/perl ithreads >> /etc/portage/package.use
echo sys-libs/glibc nomalloccheck nptl nptlonly pic userlocales >> /etc/portage/package.use
echo sys-devel/binutils multislot >> /etc/portage/package.use
echo sys-devel/gcc multislot >> /etc/portage/package.use
env-update && source /etc/profile
emerge --inject sys-libs/glibc-20050722
emerge mpfr gcc-config binutils libstdc++-v3 gcc
binutils-config 2
emerge -P binutils
gcc-config 6
rm /etc/env.d/gcc/config
cp /etc/env.d/gcc/config-i686-pc-linux-gnu /etc/env.d/gcc/config
env-update
source /etc/profile
emerge libstdc++-v3
emerge -P gcc
env-update
source /etc/profile
emerge glibc
env-update
source /etc/profile
emerge glibc binutils libstdc++-v3 gcc portage
emerge -e world
-----
Those are a summary of the steps in accomplishing this through the conrad scripts.

Bob P, you are right, Linux is a open-sources/sharing community - But do not take advantage of it, Conrad is different, you should not expect your name on the conrad install method - The one part similar to jackass is ithreads in package.use for libperl and perl.

The linux community is not about addressing people in Big red bold letters - The concept I have it not related to your jackass install.
-----
This is my final message - if you have any conclusion to this, you can pm me or email me if you want | Conrad isn't jackass, conrad wasn't created as an install method, it was created to help users experience the best gentoo experience possible, and some projects are focused on other things, such as the installable LiveCD (with lxnay's version of the gentoo gtk+ installer) is to make gentoo easier, but still is focused around the best gentoo experience, I removed 2 install options from it (stage1, and stage2) currently only supporting (Stage3, and CD-HDD Copy)

Conrad has no intention of being like Jackass - Nothing is stolen from your guide.

[Bob P]

i don't get why you keep focusing on your GCC 4.x scripts, or chainging the subject to jackass -- changing the subject only serves to obfuscate the issue; its the GCC 3.4.4 scripts that are blatant copies of the Stage 1/3 Guide. oh, nevermind.

[cheater1034]

i don't get why you keep focusing on your GCC 4.x scripts, or chainging the subject to jackass -- changing the subject only serves to obfuscate the issue; its the GCC 3.4.4 scripts that are blatant copies of the Stage 1/3 Guide. oh, nevermind.

Apparently we got into a huge misunderstanding - Conrad uses ONLY GCC 4 scripts - Not 3.4.4

The 3.4.4 Scripts lasted for about 2 days, when the guide was early development and missing a lot of features - During the 2-day period I was testing out GCC 4 and figuring the best way to get it working, The best possible way I found is what is in the conrad install today (0.5.0) - Conrad has used GCC 4 since version 0.2.

Conrad does not support the GCC 3.4.4 scripts, it doesn't mention them in the guide at all.

I thought we were talking Conrad in general - If you read over the current guide, you will learn that it certainly is not a copy of the stage1/3 guide, the GCC 3.4.4 scripts were practically the same thing, and since they are no longer in use - Maybe you could make use of them your self, Or if you want them taken down from the mirrors, that is also practical - And I will have no problem doing so.
----
So apprently this was a huge misunderstanding - I am sorry for any confusion, and good luck with the Jackass! Project and Stage 1/3 Install Method.

[johngalt]

Conrad *presently* only uses GCC4.

What you fail to realize is that you missed the boat *in the beginning*.

In case you have not figured it out, some of your steps and methodology is still based upon the stage 1/3 install and all of your original code was based upon it - you can argue until you're blue about how it is different *now* but the fact remains - you're going all Vanilla Ice on us all over again.

Please try to understand *everything* Bob and the rest of us have posted. If you don't want to give him credit say so - don't attempt to justify your actions (or lack thereof) with asinine commentary and irrelevant points - As Bob said - you developed the current Conrad from the original one based upon GCC344 - and no matter how much you may deprecate it, and no matter how much you may have developed your scripts and the use of GCC4 and Reiser4, the *original* works were basically a rip off. Therefore, everything after, no matter how modified, is still a rip off.

If you steal my car design, and build one of your on, using a different process, but still build my car - even after you modify it with better tuning, a bigger engine, exhaust, allow wheels, ground effects, etc - ***it is still a ripoff***.

EDIT: Added the following
Spell and grammar checked.

[Bob P]

now i know how Caroll Shelby feels when he sees a fake 427 Cobra drive by with Vanilla Ice blaring on the radio!

at any rate, i wanted to pass some info along to the testers: keep an eye on the Jackass! Project FTP server for tarballs. i've been sandbagging, as i had the first build of Jackass! 2005.2 finished last weekend, and i've been dragging my feet on releasing it for testing until i had a chance to perform at least one test install. as luck would have it, i built an Athlon-XP package and stuffed it into the P3 tarball by mistake, so i'm rebuilding P3 now and it will be out for testing soon.

[satanskin]

Glibc 2.3.6 just came out today.