| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kilburna
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 107
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:05 pm Post subject: Where is stage3-i586-2006.1? |
 |
|
I cannot find stage3-i586-2006.1 anywhere. There was one for previous releases.
Thanxs
Master |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
agaffney
Retired Dev
Joined: 28 May 2003
Posts: 104
Location: St. Charles, MO
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We (x86 releng) are in the process of dropping most support for <i686. The original intention was to release a stage2-x86 and stage3-x86 for 2006.1, but they were found to be messed up about a week before release, and it was decided to just drop them. At some point in the near future, we will release a set of "legacy" stages (x86, 586, and 586-nptl) built against the 2006.1 release snapshot, and that will probably be the last <i686 stages (other than probably stage1-x86) that we ever release.
Until these stages are released, you can always just use a 2006.0 i586 stage3 and then do a world upgrade afterwards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kilburna
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for making that clear.
I am upgrading a VIA board and the initial 'emerge gcc' is taking >12 hours. At this rate the complete upgrade is going to take 2 days or more. I thought it would be faster just to start fresh with 2006.1, but finding no stage3-x86-2006.1 was a bit of a surprise.
I will check back for these legacy cuts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IronEagle
n00b
Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ouch.
Thats indeed bad for "us" users of EPIA systems the Samuel C2 processor or older pentium cpus. With distcc one could use gentoo quite good on them, and get better performance than from binary distributions. On a modern CPU the difference between "generic" code and optimized code isnt THAT big as on those slow and old CPUs.
Yes, you could just wait a few days and watching emerge doing its job on such old systems untill distcc kicks in and things get faster... but a stage3 archive for those systems would be much better.
Is there a chance for you to reconsider and is there a deadline for the legacy stages? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IronEagle
n00b
Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
And btw,
the documentation needs to be corrected then:
| Quote: | Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore.
If you want to check the integrity of the downloaded stage tarball, use md5sum and compare the output with the MD5 checksum provided on the mirror. For instance, to check the validity of the x86 stage tarball:
Code Listing 6: Example checking integrity of a stage tarball
# md5sum -c stage3-x86-2006.1.tar.bz2.DIGESTS
stage3-x86-2006.1.tar.bz2: OK |
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=1&chap=5
So great. Not only looooooooooong compile times, but yay, unsupported also. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Enverex
Guru
Joined: 02 Jul 2003
Posts: 501
Location: Worcester, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wow... I never thought I'd see Gentoo drop support for old machines. Tis a cold day in old PC land. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
agaffney
Retired Dev
Joined: 28 May 2003
Posts: 104
Location: St. Charles, MO
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Enverex wrote: | | Wow... I never thought I'd see Gentoo drop support for old machines. Tis a cold day in old PC land. |
It's a bit hard for us to test the 586 stages when none of the people building them have a 586 machine. Would you rather we put out something that's completely untested? Also, there should still always be a stage1-x86 released, which can be used to install on a <i686 machine.
It's also easier on the x86 release guy, because it's less to build, test, and support. A few releases ago, there was a set of stage 2 and 3 tarballs for 5 different x86 subarches: x86, i686, pentium3, pentium4, and athlon-xp. That's 11 stage tarballs for 1 person to build, rebuild, rebuild again, test, rebuild, test, rebuild, etc., all in less than one month. They were dropped because it was too much for one person to handle, and Gentoo developers do have real lives and real jobs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neysx
Retired Dev
Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Posts: 795
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| agaffney wrote: | | It's a bit hard for us to test the 586 stages when none of the people building them have a 586 machine. Would you rather we put out something that's completely untested? |
IMHO it would be better than nothing. Besides, you can test it, the only thing you can't test is whether some i686 instruction has crept into the release. | agaffney wrote: | | Also, there should still always be a stage1-x86 released, which can be used to install on a <i686 machine. |
Saying that is almost the same as announcing Gentoo drops support for i586. Telling i586 users they have to perform an unsupported stage1 install that would take days if not weeks to complete is the same as saying don't use Gentoo. FYI, last time I compiled glibc alone on my P100, it took more than 24 hours. | agaffney wrote: | | It's also easier on the x86 release guy, because it's less to build, test, and support. A few releases ago, there was a set of stage 2 and 3 tarballs for 5 different x86 subarches: x86, i686, pentium3, pentium4, and athlon-xp. That's 11 stage tarballs for 1 person to build, rebuild, rebuild again, test, rebuild, test, rebuild, etc., all in less than one month. They were dropped because it was too much for one person to handle, and Gentoo developers do have real lives and real jobs. |
It's not all or nothing, is it? A few releases ago, we had 4 a year, now we have 2. Problem halved. Ditch all stage2s. Problem halved again. Ditch anything >i686 (pentium3, pentium4, athlon-xp), users already have the right CHOST and they can change CFLAGS after they complete the stage3 install. Recompiling world would not be required and would not be much trouble anyway should users want to. Problem more than halved again. That leaves only an i586 stage3. While any >i686 stage3 is not required, I'd say an i586 one is required. Anything <i586 might be better off considering GNAP.
My 0.02 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Halcy0n
Developer
Joined: 17 Sep 2003
Posts: 1682
Location: Freehold, NJ
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| agaffney wrote: | | Enverex wrote: | | Wow... I never thought I'd see Gentoo drop support for old machines. Tis a cold day in old PC land. |
It's a bit hard for us to test the 586 stages when none of the people building them have a 586 machine. Would you rather we put out something that's completely untested? Also, there should still always be a stage1-x86 released, which can be used to install on a <i686 machine.
It's also easier on the x86 release guy, because it's less to build, test, and support. A few releases ago, there was a set of stage 2 and 3 tarballs for 5 different x86 subarches: x86, i686, pentium3, pentium4, and athlon-xp. That's 11 stage tarballs for 1 person to build, rebuild, rebuild again, test, rebuild, test, rebuild, etc., all in less than one month. They were dropped because it was too much for one person to handle, and Gentoo developers do have real lives and real jobs. |
I never understood why the releases were never "released" until they were finalized. It'd probably help a lot if you did beta releases and allowed users to test things and give you feedback a few weeks before the actual planned release. I'm not sure why it is done the other way since having numerous other people test your work would seem to be the "right" thing to do.
Just my 2 cents.
_________________
Mark Loeser
http://www.halcy0n.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanik
l33t
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 842
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Same situation here: setting gentoo on a VIA C3 Ezra. So I need x86 or i586 at most.
Sugesstion:
- make it clear on the docs how to do this instead of just dropping support and say nothing
- make a good doc on how to do stage1 for older systems
I agree you cannot keep everything forever, but just a simple page explaining this in the installation doc isn't that hard to do.
_________________
Expert in non-working solutions |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Backiz
n00b
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yes, simply making the stage1 docs available once again would be great and people would not complain that much.
Docs for stage1 on an old machine would be really great in my opinion.
note that there is still no need to be giving support for stage1 if a user has problems, simply stating in the docs that stage1 is discouraged and warning the users that no support will be given should solve that problem.
_________________
In a world without fences, who needs Gates ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kama
n00b
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Too bad to hear...
I have been using the x86 as a linuxbase for FreeBSD. I have found that its the easiest linuxbase to work with and dropping the support for x86 will make it unavailable as an option. Well, hopefully with the new version of the linuxulator I can run the i686. I have tried before but only get segfaults.
well, well.. at least I got the reason why 6.1 did not have the stage3-x86 tarball... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elsenator
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 89
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'd like to add a little something to this thread too. I'm trying to install Gentoo on my EPIA C3 Ezra board, but i can't, since the Minimal CD's are compiled for i686 and the Ezra cpu is missing the CMOV instruction, and therefore it won't run the tools from the CD. Why aren't the minimal CD compiled for i386? Or maybe just i586 to support at broader audience? The resulting system should, as far as i know, be optimized for the correct architecture anyways. Correct me if i'm wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Conditional_Zenith
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Sep 2004
Posts: 154
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| elsenator wrote: | | I'd like to add a little something to this thread too. I'm trying to install Gentoo on my EPIA C3 Ezra board, but i can't, since the Minimal CD's are compiled for i686 and the Ezra cpu is missing the CMOV instruction, and therefore it won't run the tools from the CD. Why aren't the minimal CD compiled for i386? Or maybe just i586 to support at broader audience? The resulting system should, as far as i know, be optimized for the correct architecture anyways. Correct me if i'm wrong. |
Does <local_gentoo_mirror>/releases/x86/current/installcd/install-x86-minimal-2006.1.iso not work? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elsenator
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 89
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Conditional_Zenith wrote: |
Does <local_gentoo_mirror>/releases/x86/current/installcd/install-x86-minimal-2006.1.iso not work? |
I should've followed up on this one  The tool in question was chroot, and i found out that it was in fact the environment i was changing into that caused the problem at not the minimal cd. The minimal cd is, as it should be, fine. Sorry for the confusion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hgfischer
n00b
Joined: 19 Jul 2004
Posts: 55
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Same situation here for an VIA Epia Ezra... 
Need I drop Gentoo usage on behalf other Linux Distro? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pacho2
Developer
Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 2599
Location: Oviedo, Spain
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think that i586 support shouldn't be dropped from gentoo, it is a bad decission  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pacho2
Developer
Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 2599
Location: Oviedo, Spain
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stage3 for i586 has been released again 
Thanks a lot |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elsenator
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 89
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 1:26 pm Post subject: Woohoo! |
|
|
| YES! This is great news! Thank you, thank you, thank you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ConiKost
Developer
Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 1365
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So, if I want to use i586, i should use stage 1, yes? (in future) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pacho2
Developer
Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 2599
Location: Oviedo, Spain
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ConiKost wrote: | | So, if I want to use i586, i should use stage 1, yes? (in future) |
No, stage2 and 3 for i586 are now also available |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Portage & Programming
