1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 12:29 -0400, Kevin wrote: |
3 |
>> One thing that I'm pretty sure is currently not possible with portage, |
4 |
>> however, and that I'd definitely like to see as a part of this idea is a |
5 |
>> way of setting thresholds on version numbers of packages in portage such |
6 |
>> that the automated upgrade system will only upgrade a package |
7 |
>> automatically if the difference in version numbers between the installed |
8 |
>> package and the newest available package in portage is greater than some |
9 |
>> admin-tunable amount. For example, I might not want to upgrade emacs or |
10 |
>> xemacs just because a new -r number becomes available. Maybe I don't |
11 |
>> want to have such a big package upgraded automatically unless there is a |
12 |
>> new major or minor version number. |
13 |
>> |
14 |
>> Thanks again to all the developers who have made Gentoo. It's a really |
15 |
>> terrific distro. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Jakub meant the portage-devel mailing list, not this one. |
18 |
|
19 |
woops. when i saw portage/devel i figured one or the other... guess not... |
20 |
|
21 |
> |
22 |
> Anyway, most of this can be done already using /etc/portage files and |
23 |
> some well-written cron scripts. You can lock down versions of specific |
24 |
> packages quite easily using your own package.mask and package.unmask |
25 |
> files, along with package.keywords. |
26 |
|
27 |
Yes, and as I wrote, I'm aware of your points here, and I do use these |
28 |
capabilities fairly extensively now, but it is not the sort of |
29 |
fine-tunable system that I have in mind where I could inform the |
30 |
automated-update-system (for lack of a better name) of my wishes in |
31 |
terms of which packages are safe (in my judgment, as the sysadmin of |
32 |
that particular box) to upgrade in an unattended manner and which are |
33 |
not (at least, not unless I'm much less well-informed on Gentoo than I |
34 |
believe myself to be, which I'm not denying might be true). |
35 |
|
36 |
And unless I'm way off-base, the version-difference-threshold notion |
37 |
described above is not implemented in portage now. Someone please |
38 |
correct me if I'm wrong. |
39 |
|
40 |
> However, one thing you can *never* |
41 |
> do is assume that *any* package that has *any* kind of configuration |
42 |
> files or is a library will *never* change in an incompatible way. |
43 |
|
44 |
Well your comment is certainly true in the most extreme interpretation, |
45 |
but the same thing can be accurately said about whether or not one |
46 |
should assume that the sun is going to rise tomorrow or that the |
47 |
universe won't disappear in a quantum fluctuation while you're sleeping, |
48 |
but IMO, such extreme statements have little value in day-to-day |
49 |
application. Everyone must make some assumptions about nearly |
50 |
everything or it becomes nearly impossible to function. I make all |
51 |
kinds of assumptions in administering computers and they almost always |
52 |
make my life much, MUCH easier than it would be without the assumptions. |
53 |
Sometimes they bite me, but only rarely. The key to success here is |
54 |
having the judgment to know what is relatively safe to make assumptions |
55 |
about and what is not. Judgment is something that only a human can |
56 |
provide... not a computer. This is why I want greater and more granular |
57 |
control over upgrading packages in Gentoo. Aside from the points you |
58 |
make above (and I may be missing some other features currently present |
59 |
in Gentoo), my choices now are, in the grossest terms: upgrade every |
60 |
package by hand, one at a time, while sitting in front of the computer |
61 |
(which is very close to what I spent last weekend doing) or do an emerge |
62 |
world and hope for the best. IMO, that's not much control and does not |
63 |
allow for the application of judgment except in the former option (which |
64 |
is very, very time consuming). |
65 |
|
66 |
> |
67 |
> Basically, what you want is the assurances of a binary distribution that |
68 |
> things will "just work" when upgraded, |
69 |
|
70 |
No. Not true at all. And for that matter, binary distributions (in my |
71 |
10+ years of experience with them) simply do NOT just work: not for |
72 |
Slackware, not for Yellowdog, not for SuSE, not for Redhat, nor |
73 |
Mandrake, nor any of a dozen others I've tried. I found that quite the |
74 |
opposite was true which was one of the reasons I switched to Gentoo |
75 |
(which I've found, usually DOES just work after upgrades; not always, |
76 |
but usually---and this is a credit to the Gentoo developers). |
77 |
|
78 |
What I really want is to make the process of maintaining Gentoo boxes |
79 |
over the long term easier (IOW: less time-consuming) than is now true, |
80 |
by adding some functionality that AFAICT does not now exist which would |
81 |
allow me to automate some things, turn off automation of other things, |
82 |
and as the sysadmin, have control over what those things should be. In |
83 |
my mind at least, the central theme in Gentoo of choice dovetails nicely |
84 |
with what I'm trying to describe here: control and choice that is highly |
85 |
fine-tunable by the owner of the box in regards to package upgrades. |
86 |
|
87 |
I'm not a member of the portage-devel mailing list so I'm going to drop |
88 |
this now. If someone here is a member of both, then please feel free to |
89 |
cross-post this thread to whatever forum is most appropriate for it. |
90 |
After spending 30-45 minutes trying to help improve Gentoo by posting a |
91 |
new (AFAICT) idea in bugzilla and again here, I feel like I've done |
92 |
enough. IMHO, this is an idea that would add great value to Gentoo and |
93 |
I can't help but think that many sysadmins who must maintain many boxes |
94 |
would agree, but I have no particular attachment to the idea that would |
95 |
make me want to go around every mailing list under the sun trumpeting my |
96 |
idea to anyone who will listen. I'm just posting an idea that seemed |
97 |
like a good one to me. The devs may take it or leave it as they see fit. |
98 |
|
99 |
Regards, |
100 |
Kevin |
101 |
-- |
102 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |