Am 04.12.2013 23:31, schrieb William Hubbs: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 04:30:30PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs <willi...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: >>>> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in >>>> random package(s) a la binary-distribution style >>> >>> What about the stages? Don't we need some form of net support in >>> stage 3? >>> >> >> That's debatable. For a typical install, the user has to install other >> basic stuff like a boot loader, kernel, etc. So having them also >> select a network config framework seems logical. >> >> Is there a use case for a stage3 in which installing netifrc by hand >> is impractical? > > Personally, I don't know of one. Does anyone else?
if you're on x86/amd64 and want to prepare a sdcard for e.g. arm. you extract the stage3 to the card but then you can't just chroot and emerge netifrc... on the other hand, as long as busybox' default config includes a dhcp client one can always call it manually, unfortunately to do so. you need to have access to the system which isn't always guaranteed without network. so I strongly vote against exclude a default network stack for stage3. why not introduce a stage3 set which includes @system and other important packages like the default network stack? /martin
