Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Wishlist: an automated package upgrade system with fine-tunable sysadmin control
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:34:16
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Wishlist: an automated package upgrade system with fine-tunable sysadmin control by Kevin
1 On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 14:24 -0400, Kevin wrote:
2 > And unless I'm way off-base, the version-difference-threshold notion
3 > described above is not implemented in portage now. Someone please
4 > correct me if I'm wrong.
6 You're off-base.
8 See, you can, for example, mask all revisions within the same version of
9 a package in your /etc/portage/package.mask file quite easily. So you
10 *could* have xemacs, using your own example, only ask to upgrade once
11 the stable version in the tree went over a certain threshold.
13 > Well your comment is certainly true in the most extreme interpretation,
14 > but the same thing can be accurately said about whether or not one
15 > should assume that the sun is going to rise tomorrow or that the
16 > universe won't disappear in a quantum fluctuation while you're sleeping,
17 > but IMO, such extreme statements have little value in day-to-day
18 > application. Everyone must make some assumptions about nearly
19 > everything or it becomes nearly impossible to function. I make all
20 > kinds of assumptions in administering computers and they almost always
21 > make my life much, MUCH easier than it would be without the assumptions.
23 I'm sorry, but do your friends call you Duncan? I'll leave it at that.
25 > Sometimes they bite me, but only rarely. The key to success here is
26 > having the judgment to know what is relatively safe to make assumptions
27 > about and what is not. Judgment is something that only a human can
28 > provide... not a computer. This is why I want greater and more granular
29 > control over upgrading packages in Gentoo. Aside from the points you
30 > make above (and I may be missing some other features currently present
31 > in Gentoo), my choices now are, in the grossest terms: upgrade every
32 > package by hand, one at a time, while sitting in front of the computer
33 > (which is very close to what I spent last weekend doing) or do an emerge
34 > world and hope for the best. IMO, that's not much control and does not
35 > allow for the application of judgment except in the former option (which
36 > is very, very time consuming).
38 You missed the ability to lock down to specific package versions, which
39 is already a 100% possibility with current portage. You can lock down
40 the versions to *anything that you want* via package.mask and
41 package.unmask, then simply have your system run an "emerge --update
42 --deep world" to automatically upgrade any and all packages not listed
43 in your mask files.
45 > What I really want is to make the process of maintaining Gentoo boxes
46 > over the long term easier (IOW: less time-consuming) than is now true,
47 > by adding some functionality that AFAICT does not now exist which would
48 > allow me to automate some things, turn off automation of other things,
49 > and as the sysadmin, have control over what those things should be. In
50 > my mind at least, the central theme in Gentoo of choice dovetails nicely
51 > with what I'm trying to describe here: control and choice that is highly
52 > fine-tunable by the owner of the box in regards to package upgrades.
54 Yup. It's called /etc/portage and we've had it for a while. You simply
55 seem to be missing its flexibility.
57 > I'm not a member of the portage-devel mailing list so I'm going to drop
58 > this now. If someone here is a member of both, then please feel free to
59 > cross-post this thread to whatever forum is most appropriate for it.
60 > After spending 30-45 minutes trying to help improve Gentoo by posting a
61 > new (AFAICT) idea in bugzilla and again here, I feel like I've done
62 > enough. IMHO, this is an idea that would add great value to Gentoo and
63 > I can't help but think that many sysadmins who must maintain many boxes
64 > would agree, but I have no particular attachment to the idea that would
65 > make me want to go around every mailing list under the sun trumpeting my
66 > idea to anyone who will listen. I'm just posting an idea that seemed
67 > like a good one to me. The devs may take it or leave it as they see fit.
69 Yep. It was such a good idea that the portage team implemented it quite
70 some time ago. *grin*
72 --
73 Chris Gianelloni
74 Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
75 x86 Architecture Team
76 Games - Developer
77 Gentoo Linux


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature