1 |
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 22:45, Ron OHara wrote: |
2 |
> Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> >On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 23:39, Ron OHara wrote: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> >>Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
8 |
> >> |
9 |
> >> |
10 |
> >> |
11 |
> >>>On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 22:46, Ron OHara wrote: |
12 |
> >>> |
13 |
> >>> |
14 |
> >>> |
15 |
> >>> |
16 |
> >>>>Lisa Seelye wrote: |
17 |
> >>>> |
18 |
> >>>> |
19 |
> >>>> |
20 |
> >>>> |
21 |
> >>>> |
22 |
> >>>>>On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 22:00, Ron OHara wrote: |
23 |
> >>>>> |
24 |
> >>>>> |
25 |
> >>>>> |
26 |
> >>>>> |
27 |
> >>>>> |
28 |
> >>>>> |
29 |
> >>>>>>Hi, |
30 |
> >>>>>> |
31 |
> >>>>>>I want to raise an issue resulting from my experience so far in using |
32 |
> >>>>>>Gentoo as the basis of production systems. Some may ask why? - but |
33 |
> >>>>>>basically 'portage' seems to offer the very best framework for ongoing |
34 |
> >>>>>>maintenance/admin of systems, though it's not perfect in that role. |
35 |
> >>>>>> |
36 |
> >>>>>> |
37 |
> >>>>>> |
38 |
> >>>>>> |
39 |
> >>>>>> |
40 |
> >>>>>> |
41 |
> >>>>>There are a couple things you may want to look into. |
42 |
> >>>>> |
43 |
> >>>>>First, have you considered setting up your own rsync repository? |
44 |
> >>>>>Second, how about using PORTAGE_OVERLAY to save ebuilds. |
45 |
> >>>>> |
46 |
> >>>>> |
47 |
> >>>>> |
48 |
> >>>>> |
49 |
> >>>>> |
50 |
> >>>>> |
51 |
> >>>>> |
52 |
> >>>>> |
53 |
> >>>>An rsync repository is another part of the production deployment issues, |
54 |
> >>>>(especially for bandwidth issues) but ideally the overall process should |
55 |
> >>>>not force me to duplicate the managment effort that already goes into |
56 |
> >>>>maintaining the Gentoo portage 'repository'. That work is already being |
57 |
> >>>>done so it seems silly to have to manually administer a downstream |
58 |
> >>>>repository just to preserve 'old' ebuilds - and even then, the true |
59 |
> >>>>repository of which ebuilds are needed for a specific system is held on |
60 |
> >>>>that system .. not on another server. |
61 |
> >>>> |
62 |
> >>>>To a degree, the same thing applies to the PORTAGE_OVERLAY setting - |
63 |
> >>>>that tree may be a suitable place to preserve older ebuilds that are |
64 |
> >>>>being removed from the central portage, but I dont want to maintain it |
65 |
> >>>>manually on hundreds of systems. |
66 |
> >>>> |
67 |
> >>>> |
68 |
> >>>> |
69 |
> >>>> |
70 |
> >>>Two words... |
71 |
> >>> |
72 |
> >>>NFS mounts |
73 |
> >>> |
74 |
> >>>=] |
75 |
> >>> |
76 |
> >>> |
77 |
> >>> |
78 |
> >>> |
79 |
> >>>>-- |
80 |
> >>>>gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
81 |
> >>>> |
82 |
> >>>> |
83 |
> >>>> |
84 |
> >>>> |
85 |
> >>Hmmm ... NFS works when the systems are all nicely connected with |
86 |
> >>bandwidth, but most of these will be unique nodes on a private microwave |
87 |
> >>network (to avoid the local Telco charges .a.k.a 'gouging' - at $0.19 |
88 |
> >>per megabyte of traffic) |
89 |
> >> |
90 |
> >> |
91 |
> > |
92 |
> >That makes a big difference. In that case, I would run your own rsync |
93 |
> >mirror for portage and have all the machines sync to your mirror. I |
94 |
> >would also make a packages mirror, where you store your packages, and |
95 |
> >have all the machines pull their packages from that site. That way |
96 |
> >nothing gets added or removed from portage, except what you specifiy, |
97 |
> >and you also get the added upgrade speed and ease of binary packages. |
98 |
> > |
99 |
> > |
100 |
> > |
101 |
> I am assuming the deployment of a private rsync mirror (and packages |
102 |
> mirror) - BUT - the current setup removes .ebuilds unless I manually |
103 |
> intervene. Something I want to avoid. I just want to accumulate ebuilds |
104 |
> by default to match the exact version of compiled code on each box. Then |
105 |
> any given machine can be recompiled if required, without regard to |
106 |
> accessing an external repository. |
107 |
|
108 |
Well, what I would do is have the rsync mirror *not* mirror the |
109 |
"official" Gentoo tree into its rsync, but rather into the normal |
110 |
/usr/portage. I would then manually move ebuilds for security fixes and |
111 |
any upgrades I wanted into the rsync tree. The same would be true of |
112 |
the packages. That way you only have *exactly* what you want and have |
113 |
approved available to the client machines. |
114 |
|
115 |
e.g. /usr/portage is normal portage tree, /usr/portage/packages is |
116 |
normal package tree, /var/rsync/portage is YOUR portage tree. I would |
117 |
publish the packages via a web server. The nice thing about this is |
118 |
that you can standardize on quite a bit of packages. If you wanted |
119 |
everyone using KDE, for example, you simply don't copy any of Gnome's |
120 |
ebuilds to your /var/rsync/portage tree. |
121 |
|
122 |
-- |
123 |
Chris Gianelloni |
124 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
125 |
Games Team |
126 |
|
127 |
Is your power animal a pengiun? |