Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Software Linux

Gentoo Linux 2004.2: What You See Is What You Get 78

Posted by timothy from the presto-change-oh dept.
editingwhiz writes "Jem Matzan has a cogent analysis of the new Gentoo Linux 2004.2 on Linux.com: "Gentoo Linux is the BSD of GNU/Linux distributions; it's elegant and customizable and you know exactly what you're getting when you install it. No mystery programs, no packages that you have to deinstall because you'll never use, no clutter, and everything is customized to your needs. If you do it right, Gentoo is also faster than your average GNU/Linux distro because everything can be compiled with higher compiler optimizations." (Linux.com is part of the OSTG network.)" Jem also has some criticism of the current version of Gentoo's AMD64 version.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gentoo Linux 2004.2: What You See Is What You Get More

Gentoo Linux 2004.2: What You See Is What You Get

Comments Filter:

  • WYSIWYG (Score:5, Informative)

    by alatesystems ( 51331 ) <chris@[ ]isbenard.net ['chr' in gap]> on Friday September 17, 2004 @04:12PM (#10280445) Homepage Journal
    What you see and what you get is a bash prompt on the cd boot. It is worse than slackware on the install, unless you get that new-fangled(yes I know red hat uses it and has forever) Anaconda working, but who does that anyway?

    Gentoo is great though because you can send a friend a cd and have him pop it in and forward port 22 and do /etc/init.d/sshd start; passwd and then you can remote in and install linux for them, or in my case, on a colo that had a bad hard drive.

    I like gentoo, but to set it up right takes quite a while and a lot of patience.

    Chris

    • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sbennett ( 448295 ) <spb@gentoo.o3.1415926rg minus pi> on Friday September 17, 2004 @04:28PM (#10280574)
      What you see and what you get is a bash prompt on the cd boot. It is worse than slackware on the install

      I'd have said "better than slackware on the install". I realise I'm in the minority here, but I like a simple, text-based install process. After Gentoo's, my favourite installers (of those I've used) are Debian's old-style one and [Free|Open]BSD. They do what they need to, and don't get in the way.

      Oh, and the other major plus with Gentoo's install: you don't need an install CD to do it; any Linux system will do. I haven't yet found another distro or OS that lets you do that.

      • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:5, Informative)

        by ComputerSlicer23 ( 516509 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @05:46PM (#10281108)
        Anaconda can be run from the command line.

        Start by fetching a couple of files off of the RedHat boot disk. From the images directory, you'll want to grab the boot floppy you need (depends on if you plan on doing a network or cdrom based install).

        In my example, I grabbed bootdisk.img, and I put it in tmp. You'll also need RedHat/base/stage2.img also.

        cd /tmp ;
        mkdir bootdisk
        mount -o loop bootdisk.img /tmp/bootdisk
        cp /tmp/bootdisk/initrd.img /tmp/initrd.img.gz
        gunzip initrd.img.gz
        mkdir initrd
        mount -o loop initrd.img /tmp/initrd
        mkdir stage2
        mount -o loop stage2.img /tmp/stage2
        mkdir install-root
        ( cd initrd ; tar cvf - . ) | ( cd /tmp/install-root ; tar xf - )
        ( cd stage2 ; tar cvf - . ) | ( cd /tmp/install-root ; tar xf - )
        mount -t proc none /tmp/install-root/proc
        chroot /tmp/install-root/ /usr/bin/anaconda --method http://pub.whitebox.mirror/whitebox/3.0/en/os/i386 --text
        That starts the installer running, and is attempting to do a network install from whatever website you replace "pub.whitebox.mirror" with (you probably have to adjust the rest of the URL, but it's the path I use on my local whitebox mirror).

        The installer starts to run at that point. I had to run it from the console, and I was intentionally in run level 3 rather then 5 (I should have gone to single user mode, but I was lazy). I get a nice curses application at this point. It got all the way to the part where it wanted me to repartition my disk. I have no free partitions to actually attempt an install. However, I'm fairly sure I could have finished the install (if I couldn't the heavy lifting was pretty much done with, it would have been a series of small problems to overcome).

        It's a bit of pain, and there's probably an easier way to do it, but that's how I figured out how to run the installer in less then 30 minutes after reading your message. (I remember reading on the WhiteBox lists that it should be possible to just start a remote install via an SSH session, but I've never actually seen the procedure written up). I figured it couldn't be that hard. Anaconda is nothing more then a python script that runs. It needs a bit of runtime support, but nothing special.

        Kirby

        • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:2, Interesting)

          by strikethree ( 811449 )
          It would probably be easier if you just booted with a Knoppix cd and mounted the drive you want to install to under /mnt/gentoo. You can then start from stage 1 in a chroot environment. Do dmesg | less to see what kind of drivers you will need. Gentoo does come with a LiveCD that is perfect for installing from... but Knoppix has Frozen Bubble and Mozilla to keep you occupied while it compiles.

          strike
      • I'd have said "better than slackware on the install". I realise I'm in the minority here, but I like a simple, text-based install process. After Gentoo's, my favourite installers (of those I've used) are Debian's old-style one and [Free|Open]BSD. They do what they need to, and don't get in the way.

        I'm afraid that doesn't make sense. You (1) like a text-based installer, (2) like it simple and (3) like Debian's installer, which is renowned as arcane and hard to use.

        I fail to see how Slackware's install, which

      • You are not alone. What is best about a simple command prompt installer is that you do not have to spend ages in case your video card settings are wrong.

    • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:3, Insightful)

      by 3) profit!!! ( 773340 )
      But you learn SO MUCH about how your system works. Afterwards you're able to use your computer so much better, since you know how it got that way in the first place. The documentation guides you very well through the process, too. If you aren't capable of installing from the command line, you won't be able to fix any problems from the command line either.

      • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Boglin ( 517490 )
        I've heard this argument before, but it's never quite worked for me. I think there's two ways it can be interpreted and both have flaws. Another (supportive of Gentoo) poster has already said that Gentoo simply requires that you can follow EXACT instructions. That makes me nervous, as it sounds like it's not really learning, but rather just memorizing a bunch of commands. If that's the case, I don't think Gentoo really leaves you all that better trained than the ape at phone-tech support who flips throu

        • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:2, Insightful)

          by lsmeg ( 529105 )

          Conversely, though, it might be that Gentoo actually has good documentation that tells you WHY things work as opposed to just a list of key commands. If that's the case, however, why do I actually need the distro? Can't I just read the Gentoo documentation, learn about Linux's innerworkings, and then just apply that to whatever distro I see fit

          From my small experience with gentoo, this is actually the case. The docs are really good, in that they tell you what to do, why you're doing it, and what effect

          • I have no particular quarrel with Gentoo, I have many friends who love it to bitses. I just have too many machines of different architectures to make it practicable to maintain without involving a greater time commitment than is feasible.

            But using the "but you learn so much" argument is silly.

            If you really want to learn about Linux, the best way by far is to try Linux From Scratch.

            In the meantime, I bet you anything you want I'll get more actual work done on my Slackware machines with the majority of the co

          • I have both Gentoo and Fedora systems, and I agree that the Gentoo install procedure is very good at teaching about the inner workings of a Linux box. As many other gentoo users have said, I've learned more from installing Gentoo, than I have from many years of using other versions of Linux.

            But once it's installed, it's a different matter - The learning curve stops. It could be argued that the portage is *too* good. Installing new software or updates on Gentoo is so simple it's unreal! Okay it might be tim

        • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:5, Insightful)

          by GimmeFuel ( 589906 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @08:14PM (#10282053) Homepage
          I've heard this argument before, but it's never quite worked for me. I think there's two ways it can be interpreted and both have flaws. Another (supportive of Gentoo) poster has already said that Gentoo simply requires that you can follow EXACT instructions. That makes me nervous, as it sounds like it's not really learning, but rather just memorizing a bunch of commands. If that's the case, I don't think Gentoo really leaves you all that better trained than the ape at phone-tech support who flips through a manual and tells you to do whatever the book said without and actual cognitive thought.

          Installing Gentoo isn't a magic rite of passage that turns anyone into an experienced Linux guru. All Gentoo does is force you to use command-line tools like mount and mk*fs. Compare this to other distros where the option is there to use the command-line tools, but it's easier to use the shiny GUI app. It's like the difference between a High School Spanish class and taking a foreign exchange trip to Spain for a few months; you will learn a lot more (assuming you want to learn in the first place) if you have to immerse yourself in a unfamiliar environment where you have to learn if you want to get anything done.

          Of course, this path isn't suitable for everybody, which is why things like High School Spanish and RedHat exist. To each his own.

          Conversely, though, it might be that Gentoo actually has good documentation that tells you WHY things work as opposed to just a list of key commands. If that's the case, however, why do I actually need the distro? Can't I just read the Gentoo documentation, learn about Linux's innerworkings, and then just apply that to whatever distro I see fit. After all, if I can edit an XF86Config file by hand under Gentoo, I can edit it by hand under RedHat. The GUI tools may change between distros, but the important stuff is always the same, so the Gentoo docs should be universal, making Gentoo a doc project that just has some sample software attached to it.

          If Gentoo was only about teaching people how to use the console, then it probably would just be a pile of docs. However, Gentoo is about much more, which is why it is a full-fledged distro.

        • Well you are pushed to look up things like the use command and are encouraged to choose kernel options. Though I can simple use genkernel, which creates an extremly module full kernel (basically same as one on boot disk) to support any and all hardware. But you really don't want this. In fact the genkernel created kernel didn't work for mem don't know why this is.
      • Learing how your system works is great. But I already know. Most of the time when I want to install linux on a new system, I just want to get it installed. Not having excess packages is great, and control over the install is great, but extra typing and waiting is not. In that vein, RedHat's installer is tolerable, but not optimal in that it's hard to get as minimal an install as I'd like. Debian's installer is pretty good, though it requires doing a bit more manual work than I'd like. Anything more ma
        • If its the wasted time you dislike, here is what you do:
          1) Setup a gentoo system as a template for each role of computer you would to set up.
          2) tar.bz2 relevant partitions
          3) script partition creation, and extraction
          4) burn to CD

          Now installing is as easy as running a script. Simple.

      • Re:WYSIWYG (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Phleg ( 523632 )
        I, as a former Gentoo user, used to believe this. And then I realized how ludicrous it was to believe that typing "emerge world" somehow gives you any insight into how the operating system itself works.

        Yes, you become familiar with some aspects of BASH. Yes, you learn what chroot does. Yes, you could have learned all of it by simply picking up a book and reading, or just looking around in /usr/bin on a clean system.

        Gentoo doesn't make you a knowledgeable Linux user. Spending time actually at the command-l
        • 'emerge world' might not seem particularly instructive, but the process that
          gets you there is. For instance, what programs are in the world file and why
          are they there? They didn't appear there on their own. They're there because
          the admin (presumably you) decided you wanted them on the system.

          Obviously, some tools are there because you can't live without them (vim,
          for example). Others might be there because the description looked interesting
          and you wanted to give them a try. But NOTHING is in the world file
      • Compiling the software doesn't give you any more knowledge about the system.

        How does installing gentoo from the command line give any more knowledge than installing a base debian/slackware/arch/openna/whatever system and using apt/pacman/swaret etc. to install the base system from binaries?

        The only thing I learnt from the Gentoo installs I did was that you can set the timezone by linking /etc/localtime to the correct file - which I only ever needed to know in Gentoo, as every other distro had some easier-
  • "I see nothing!"

    But I suppose someone would claim the quote is flame bait...

  • Gentoo is for learning/inaccuraces in doc (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oldosadmin ( 759103 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @04:32PM (#10280610) Homepage
    The key feature most people miss about gentoo is that it's a great LEARNING DISTRO. I learned many times more in my 5 months of using gentoo than I did in using RHL/FC for a year. Not to mention the great docs/community... anyone who can follow EXACT directions, has some patience, and basic linux knowledge should be able to install Gentoo.

    One thing (big thing) it missed about 2004.2 was the move from XFree default to XOrg...

    Also... by slow development... I don't know what they mean? Portage is gaining features (try one of the pre-releases), and the ebuilds still fly out fast after new software is released.

    Whenever I run linux (I move from Win/Linux often), Gentoo is my distro of choice by a long shot.
    • But last I checked, earlier today, they STILL didn't have stable releases of Mozilla 1.7.3 and Mozilla-Firefox 1.0PRE to build from source. They did have binary releases, but the source releases were still ~x86.

      I'd also feel better if the GLSA (Gentoo Linux Security Advisory) about Mozilla would get out there.
      • echo 'net-www/mozilla-firefox ~x86' >> /etc/portage/package.keywords

        or if you care that much, just run ~x86.
        • No, nobody should run ~x86 unless they really want their computer to break. Installing a few packages here and there is fine (but only by using /etc/portage/package.keywords NOT ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86"), but when the fine gentoo maintainers decide that the new experimental glibc is not stable enough even for ~x86 and they roll it back, boy will you be in for a ride.
      • That's because mozilla source tarballs don't compile when shipped. The last three mozilla/firefox releases have all been either broken or incomplete from a compiling-from-source perspective. The current bunch doesn't compile properly with freetype+gtk2 enabled.

        The GLSA is getting there [gentoo.org], but it's kinda hard when upstream don't release working tarballs... Debian et al have it easy, they only have to make it build on one box with one set of configure options. Gentoo has to make it compile anywhere with any se
        • I'd just like to have a GLSA notice that there is a problem, that they know about it, and are working on it. Oh, it would also be good if they would suggest a workaround, like you have. (Thank you, very much.) I have the Win-box fully updated, and for the moment use that for the more general web, and the Gentoo box sticks to safe sites.

          I'm not really a font fiend, so I'll probably drop the freetype and build mozilla as ~x86, as oldosadmin suggests. I need to check the syntax and see if I can set just 1.7.3

  • Gentoo. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rincebrain ( 776480 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @04:34PM (#10280623) Homepage
    I run three Gentoo boxes, and I must say, Gentoo is, by far, the most convenient Linux I've installed...when you already know what you're doing. =)

    If you don't know what you're doing, and something is slightly off-kilter...you're better off in Debian or some other distro with an easier installer which won't give you a scary cryptic error message.

    Also, Portage is the single best software management I've ever encountered, bar none...though occasionally, user error means you wait awhile for packages to become stable.

    When you run stable, though, you very rarely have a problem with a "required" upgrade due to a bug...relatively rarely, of course. =)

    In addition, Gentoo is second to none in documentation and error repair...the mailing list sends out documentation of a bug, along with complete list of affected versions of a package, and fixes.

    Finally, 2004.2 fixes a few nasty bugs in the installer LiveCD, so, in my experience, it's far more stable and reliable for certain hardware configurations.

    Note: I've only done x86 installs myself, so YMMV. =)

    • Re:Gentoo. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by josepha48 ( 13953 )
      "If you don't know what you're doing, and something is slightly off-kilter...you're better off in Debian or some other distro with an easier installer which won't give you a scary cryptic error message."

      I'd suggest if you don't know what you are doing to use fedora or SuSE or Mandrake. Debian is still more for the 'geek' than fedora or SuSE.

      I'd have to say that having used FreeBSD, NetBSD, RH/Fedora, and Slackware, Gentoo is a refreshing change. It gives me all the drivers in GNU/Linux, and the BSD mini

    • If you don't know what you're doing, and something is slightly off-kilter...you're better off in Debian or some other distro with an easier installer which won't give you a scary cryptic error message.

      Do you guys actually ever listen to how condescending you sound? It's your distribution of choice; get over yourself.

      Also, Portage is the single best software management I've ever encountered, bar none

      Really? Because apt and ports have been around for far, far longer, and are far, far more mature.

      • WYSIWYG. With apt I see outdated, broken, and/or missing packages everywhere. More mature my ass. Source based Linux is far more practical.

        Apt is great in theory but until all of Linux unites behind it as THE binary standard, its problems will not go away. I'll switch off Gentoo the day I can reliably go to ANY Linux software website, EXPECT a download for a .deb, double click install it, and expect it to work.

        As it stands, most Linux software is released as source only and it is the distro's responsibili

        • With apt I see outdated, broken, and/or missing packages everywhere. More mature my ass.

          As for what this actually has to do with apt, I have no clue. Package selection != package management.

          Source based Linux is far more practical.

          Right, because installing development tools on every server and having to spend two hours of system resources compiling every upgrade is more practical than a three-second binary installation.

          Apt is great in theory but until all of Linux unites behind it as THE binary sta

    • Also, Portage is the single best software management I've ever encountered, bar none...though occasionally, user error means you wait awhile for packages to become stable.

      Hmmmm...USE flags are great, but I wouldn't say Portage is the best package management system; it doesn't even have reverse dependency checking!

  • I'd like to see that quantified (Score:5, Interesting)

    by martinde ( 137088 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @04:35PM (#10280624) Homepage
    Can someone show me benchmarks that real programs are really faster on the same hardware than some other distro? I've seen benchmarks that say the opposite, but I've never seen any that support this common claim.

    I do realize that optimizing for the "correct" CPU should provide improved performance, but I wonder how much improvement you really see with gcc in this case.
    • Well, it depends upon the arch... On x86 it's about 15%, on ultrasparc it's about 40%, since v7 opcodes have to be emulated. Heck, even debian roll v9 openssl binaries because of it :)
    • I've seen benchmarks. On current processors, there was not as much difference as on older ones. I've always preferred using Gentoo with -Os because, in theory, it should decrease load times on slower hard disks. I haven't done any comparisons, though.

      One thing I would like is if you could modify the optimizations based on the package without editing the ebuild. Most things I'd like to have optimized for size, but things like mencoder and similar cpu intensive tasks could potentially benefit from optimi
    • Click here [gentoo.org] or next time just google.

  • Kernels (Score:2, Informative)

    by keesh ( 202812 ) *
    I don't think the author understands gentoo's kernel naming system... gentoo-sources is 2.4.x, gentoo-dev-sources is 2.6.x. The only reason they've not been merged is that portage is rather too happy to upgrade slotted versions. The -dev- part doesn't indicate that it's any less stable.

    Oh, and there is no default kernel on gentoo. You install whatever you want :)

  • Optimisations generator (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Great to see more coverage for my fave distro. Gentoo doesn't get the exposure it deserves, which is a shame as it has a bright future ahead. Anyway, having installed it on various boxes and trying to make the most of my hardware, I put together a script that generates the most appropriate optimisations (CFLAGS) based on your hardware. All you need to do is set the options and you're ready to go:

    Gentoo Optimisations Generator [worldcinemasoc.com]

  • I love Gentoo, but does it have a future? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION ( 553878 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @06:06PM (#10281244)
    When I first started using Gentoo back in 2001 or 2002, I did it on a lark and figured the system would just fly apart into a thousand pieces right in my face after a few weeks. I mean, I'm supposed to keep every package in the system updated every few days? Surely, at some point, something will go wrong, and I'll find myself in the unsolvable dependency hell I find myself in so frequently in with RPMs. Yet I ended up staying with that very installation until just recently I started over again with 2004.1 because it seemed like the easiest way to upgrade from gcc 2.95. And, up until the point that I couldn't find any packages that worked with gcc 2.95 anymore, I was always up to date with almost all software I ran on the system.

    I've thought about switching to Debian a few times, because I'm really not particularly fond of linux configuration as a hobby (it gets old after 5 years or so, you know?) But it's always so disheartening to drop back a few versions on all the packages I'm running. And in the meantime I've gotten used to Gentoo's strange world, and now I guess it's a habit.

    Still, hats off to the Gentoo development teams--for something that probably appeals to such a limited demographic, it works far more fantastically well then I ever would have thought.

    My only wonder is--if .NET (mono) and Java really take off in the future with Just-In-Time compilation, will Gentoo become less interesting. Essentially, EVERY computer is going to start compiling optimized versions of its code for its particular needs. In fact, since the optimizations are at run-time, we can expect JIT to be even more machine-specific than Gentoo's optimization and USE flags. Like, if I install another Gig of memory future JIT compilers might gradually recompile all the bytecode on my system to unroll loops more often or something.

    So, in the future, I think we'll be sitting somewhere halfway in between Gentoo and binary distribution--sending diffs of the bytecodes for my applications out instead of binary or source.

    And while I'm dreaming, why don't we make those bytecodes proof carrying code. Like, for every piece of code executing on my system, I want to see either the automatically checked proof that the code won't explode my system, or the name of someone who signed the code claiming it won't explode my system. If neither of those are found, I want Future Gentoo to issue a big flashing red warning "WARNING THIS CODE WILL EAT YOUR PARENTS DO NOT INSTALLL!!!!!!!" Man, the future is going to be so awesome.

    • Re:I love Gentoo, but does it have a future? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Stevyn ( 691306 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @06:24PM (#10281338)
      Well it's not going to take over the world. But for a small amount of people (myself included) it be prefered. I don't think their intentions were ever to make it the number one linux distro. But I think it will stay alive for a while as distros keep trying to struggle with required packages and bloat.
    • The halting problem effectively won't let you prove the robustness of arbitrary code. You may be able to prove a subset of code to be robust, but I don't think you'd be able to do anything interesting.
      • But for every program that halts, there is a proof that it halts, correct? I think the idea with Proof Carrying Code is that the compiler (the thing that writes out the bytecodes in the first place) generates the proof, possibly with human programmer assistance. The virtual machine just verifies that the proof is correct.

        I guess there are computability limitations on the kinds of robustness for which a proof cannot be found automatically, and I'm also guessing that not all robust programs will be provab

  • Gentoo is looking for feedback (Score:3, Informative)

    by viniosity ( 592905 ) on Friday September 17, 2004 @06:44PM (#10281500) Homepage Journal
    Looks like the Gentoo folks put up a survey [gentoo.org] intended for current users asking for feedback. I hope posting that link here doesn't result in flames or bogus responses.. they have enough work to do without trolls so please answer responsibly.
    • I filled it out. It wasn't much. They just ask some basic questions and any positives and negatives you have about gentoo.

      For the purpose of discussion, my favorite aspect of gentoo is portage. I had a hard time thinking about anything negative. Most problems I've had aren't from Gentoo, but other packages giving me headaches. I run KDE because I like the desktop environment as opposed to a bare bones window manager that requires more tinkering to get it working as easily. Well, that's my experience
    • Thaks for the info. I had to think what i want changed. And the answer was NOTHING. :)
  • I wonder what problems he had, because I had none installing. Although I did it from 2004.0, I would think things might get more stable as time progressed. Though, I think I tried to pick my hardware as linux supported when I built this system.

    It was a huge improvement over Mandrake for AMD64 which I used for about a week. Mandrake, which I love and still use on my i386 system, had way too many packages that were goofed up, or that I had problems with. I think the source based approach is very nice for le

  • Only if you prelink will it be faster. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BrookHarty ( 9119 ) on Saturday September 18, 2004 @12:02AM (#10283145) Journal
    Yes, compiling with optimizations will make it run faster, but not the fastest. A prelinked system will outrun a non-prelinked system. This is why Mandrake would boot faster than normal Gentoo install, and KDE was faster in launching applications, etc.

    So...

    http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/prelink-howto.xml [gentoo.org]

    There are lots of speed tweaks, someone should start a webpage.
  • I am not laying flame bait here....

    But from experience I have talked to allot of people about linux and open source over the years and now I tend to say yeah open source is great! you actually seen any?

    I like to edit code and recompile it even if its to flavour the textual output of an application or kernel to something more personal like instead of "Safe to power off!" sort thing to "Safe to power off! no wait bzzzztttt!"

    From a philosophical stand point distributing the "open source" seem's a
  • This is touched on a little bit in Jem's review, but I thought this would be a good place to add a few more notes:

    Gentoo's Install Documentation Lives here:
    http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/inde x .xml

    Many people, though, wish Gentoo had a more automated install.

    There is an "Official" Gentoo Installer Project.
    They are taking their time, with the hope of getting it right, making it useable for nearly everybody.
    Project Roadmap:
    http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/releng/ins taller/
    Mailing list archives here:
    ht
  • I have to disagree on the comment about "no packages that you have to deinstall because you'll never use" I had to remove nano the last time I installed gentoo :)
  • Most the ppl here are just saying "OMG, IT HARD INSTALL." Ok, we get it.

    Here are the pros and cons as I see for gentoo.

    Pros:
    -----

    Good Documentation -- I have always had a problem resolved by simply reading the documentation. If it was a hardware specific issue even the gentoo nerds will talk about in the forums :-D

    Fast(or slow?) -- Ok, this depends on how you set up your system but I have prelinked all my kde (though I use it none).

    Easy to install software -- Yes, I love emerge. I used to use a slac

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Close