| 1 |
hi ! |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>They could either a) wait for the next update in X months or b) put it in |
| 4 |
>an overlay |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
well, overlay is usually the only way for custom ebuilds which are not |
| 8 |
in the portage tree |
| 9 |
but i want to believe that for server/cluster management there is (will |
| 10 |
be) a better way of doing this |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
>>in my humble opinion, it would be better (for my purposes) to have more |
| 13 |
>>'user friendly' way of configuring which packages and under which |
| 14 |
>>circumstances i want to update (or get a notification about an important |
| 15 |
>>update) when i do emerge -u world |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>Can you elaborate on how you see this working? Not sure I understand. |
| 19 |
>Again, try to focus on requirements instead of implementation. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
.... |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
>OK, but you can do this today with the features already in portage. You |
| 26 |
>can create your own custom profiles and nail specific versions of packages |
| 27 |
>while still allowing others to track against the tree. What additional |
| 28 |
>requirements do you have that aren't currently offered? |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
hm, first of all, when i was reading man page for portage, i was warned |
| 32 |
that i should not edit anything except make.conf |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
i try to describe how i would like to use portage for my servers |
| 35 |
i imagine that there is a slowly moving tree/profile/somethingelse which |
| 36 |
i use as a base for my installation |
| 37 |
then, there will be a file/directory where i define '/etc/make.profile/* |
| 38 |
overlay'; |
| 39 |
i should be able to specify (for example) that i want to use latest |
| 40 |
openssl 0.9.7; latest tinc package which is available |
| 41 |
i may also need to nail a package to one specific version for whichever |
| 42 |
reason |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
these settings should be in a private files so that i don't need to |
| 45 |
handle merging of my changes with 'official' updates to these files |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
as for the creation of custom profile -> my main idea is that there will |
| 48 |
be 'server tree/profile/etc ...' but easily customizable WITHOUT |
| 49 |
changing some portage files (but adding custom ones, something like |
| 50 |
portage overlay) |
| 51 |
in the fact, i don't want to specify version of every package .. i just |
| 52 |
want to tweak some solid/stable installation to server my needs |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
one of the important thing is dependency handling; let's imagine that |
| 55 |
there is a package in the server tree which works well with openssl 0.9.6 |
| 56 |
but higher version is required to work with openssl 0.9.7 (this is just |
| 57 |
an example !) |
| 58 |
when i explicitly say that i want to use 0.9.7; i'd expect that portage |
| 59 |
installs higher version of the other package, even if lower version |
| 60 |
is in the server tree (with warnings, but automatically) |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
i would also appreciate if the packages with security vulnerabilities |
| 63 |
would be somehow visible during emerge -up -> so that if my current |
| 64 |
'constraints' on package versions are blocking an update which |
| 65 |
compromises my security, i can immediately see it |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
well, these are just some ideas ... it may be that it can be all |
| 68 |
achieved with the current portage; i just haven't find all the answers |
| 69 |
in the documentation and man pages ... |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
one more remark to quarterly updates |
| 72 |
i would personally prefer slowly moving tree with constant updates then |
| 73 |
'a big one' every three months |
| 74 |
i think that it is more manageable for servers which need to run 24/7; |
| 75 |
basically this is the reason why i like gentoo; that it protects me from |
| 76 |
'big updates' which are always a pain (imho) |
| 77 |
|
| 78 |
regards, |
| 79 |
martin |
Archives