| 1 |
I need feedback on this cunning plan. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
I have five (virtual machine) systems which are mostly identical. |
| 4 |
Originally I customized each one with a different set of use flags. |
| 5 |
Each one has a different set of applications with a common core. I |
| 6 |
started updating them last night and woke up this morning to three of |
| 7 |
them building xorg-x11 (and they're still at it, pity my poor CPUs). |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Needless to say this pushed my Mr. grumpy hot button and I want to |
| 10 |
change how I do things. I'm beginning to think what I should do is |
| 11 |
create a unified make.conf which is as common as possible. Only |
| 12 |
difference being maybe the references to the cache (which is one of the |
| 13 |
five machines). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
after creating a unified make.conf, I believe I should set up a build |
| 16 |
process on one machine to create binary packages as well as managing its |
| 17 |
disk space cleaning up the temporary directory, and expiring old or |
| 18 |
redundant packages. Then the four other machines should install the |
| 19 |
binary packages in preference to building their own. But after the |
| 20 |
binary packages are installed, they should go through a source update |
| 21 |
for their own individual packages. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
make sense? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
what would be the best way for the four other machines to access the |
| 26 |
binary packages? NFS? File copy? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
suggestions for managing disk space and expiring old packages? I've |
| 29 |
found one which I'm trying out (distmaint) but it takes so long, it's |
| 30 |
definitely a candidate for cron. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
suggestions are most appreciated. I want to make this process of |
| 33 |
updating a faster one requiring less attention. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
thank you |
| 36 |
---eric |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives