Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 24413 - The Guide has been inconsistently edited
Summary: The Guide has been inconsistently edited
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: [OLD] Docs-user
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Gentoo Alternative Installation Guide (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Docs Team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-07-13 14:52 UTC by Whit Blauvelt
Modified: 2003-07-14 10:53 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Whit Blauvelt 2003-07-13 14:52:50 UTC
The Alternative Installation Guide used to have a very useful method of using  
chroot to install from within, say, Knoppix or RedHat. I've used it several  
times successfully, and was coming back to it to finish installation on a  
system I began with several months ago. The guide still refers to the chroot  
method, for instance in Section 3: "Requirements: In order to install Gentoo  
from your existing Linux distribution you need to have chroot command  
installed." But the chroot instructions have been totally removed from the  
document. Instead it just gives instructions for using Tom's Root Boot disk.  
This is useless to me because (1) There's no floppy drive in this machine and  
(2) Tom's is an antique that doesn't support Reiserfs, which I use almost  
exclusively. (Note, there is a superior alternative to Tom's that some French  
guy put together that does do Reiser - can't recall the name offhand but it's  
much more curent in many respects.)  
  
Please put the previous version of the Alternative Guide back up, and if  
you're going to leave the current, truncated, less useful version up, please  
edit it so it is at least consistent enough not to promise a chroot method and  
then not deliver it. An Alternative Guide should present as many alternatives 
as possible. Why was a useful alternative so haphazardly cut out? 

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Comment 1 Whit Blauvelt 2003-07-13 14:57:25 UTC
Oops - perhaps the chroot part has always been in the main document. I see 
there's no choice here for the submitter to mark the bug report as invalid. 
Why not? 
Comment 2 Sven Vermeulen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-07-14 10:53:58 UTC
I'll do it for you, otherwise it keeps on popping up on my "Docs-Team buglist" page :)