Re: [gentoo-user] Re: anti-portage wreckage?

[Mike Myers]

On 12/26/06, James <wireless@×××××××××××.com> wrote:
>
> Mike Myers <fluffymikey <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> > Hi!  I know I don't post here much but I read it a lot and have been
> using
> Gentoo for several years now.  I keep seeing users mention about how they
> do an
> update and then everything goes to crap.  I've experienced this myself
> quite a
> bit too.  I believe the reason this happens is the drawback one of
> Gentoo's
> nicest features; constantly being up to date.
>
>
> Hello MIke,
>
> Folks probably will not like my suggestions, but it works
> in lieu of a better schema, so aplogies to all I offend, in
> advance........
>
> Gentoo servers (firewall, dns, mail, web ...) rarely suffer from these
> issues, in fact, I believe one of gentoo's largest unexplored niches
> should be Large Installation System Administration (via cfengine).
>
> So, in my opinion, where Gentoo is really challenged, is the workstation
> (laptop, desktop....). You know the X11 + kde/gnome software boxen.
> What I do is keep one (workstation) system
> on the bleeding edge (very frequent upgrades) so as to discern
> where breakage or unecessary updates are looming. Since I admin an ever
> expanding hoarde of gentoo based servers and workstations, development
> of some tools to compile, distribute and manage the various x86 and amd64
> machines we have, is way past due. As soon as I have a scheme I'm
> happy with, we'll be deploying lots of embedded gentoo based systems.
>
> So I update the test workstation on fridays, use it over the weekend a
> nd then update the other systems. Granted, if the devs release something
> (broken) over the weekend, I get screwed with this scheme sometimes.
> I should update the test system daily (in the mornings) and then
> update the other systems on the same day after that.
>
> Problems with that scenario is the various methods of proxying the
> downloads and syncs are problematic in and of themselvs, not very
> often, but still bad enough to make those current schemes, less
> than desirable. Futhermore, DistCC is still a 'work in progress'
> and I've experience just enough hassle that it has been disabled
> (also due in part to so many different variants of x86).
>
> Long story short:  Gentoo is the best distro for our work, as one only
> has to installed debian, suse, or redhat for a week or two, to realize
> just how spoiled you get with Gentoo.  That said, I've learned to be
> cautious and patient with key software upgrades on Gentoo. However this
> approach burns lots of extra time. My hope is Gentoo will continue to
> improve and become more of a 'production' distro, as the other Linux
> distros all seem to have unacceptable flaws, for our needs.
>
> Future:
> What is really needed is a group of users, with similar needs, to define
> commonality of core applications that are essential to the needs: What
> this means is a list of software, for example openoffice, kde-meta,
> apache,
> java, perl, python, C, etc. that forms a core of what we all need (not
> what
> we want). Then set up cfengine to push binaries, via a trusted mechanisms,
> to each of the arch categories) Maybe on a weekly  basis. Each
> network, business or usergroup, would use their test system for 24 hours
> as a quarrantined update, before pushing to the rest of their machines.
> Or maybe push sources that are know good, to the test server at each
> participating location.
>
> If fact what the one (initially) master server environment sets up
> uses, could  be duplicated at any remote location with a group of systems.
> Individuals could feed (download binaries) from those locations, with
> the proper security mechanisms agreed to. If  a group of locations
> with multiple systems use a common update semantic, then it would be
> a lot less work, as opposed to each cleaver admin, rolling their own
> solution..... If something actually worked reasonable well, talented
> admins could offer this service to commercial clients, thus generating
> excitement about gentoo, and funding for many needy geeks.....
>
> If you only have one or 2 gentoo sytems, something like this is not worth
> the effort. For those of us looking to manage dozens to hundreds of
> gentoo based systems, the need for some management scheme, is long
> overdue.
> JFFNMS goes a LONG way to solving the problem, but, it is not
> centric to the needs of gentoo systems.  A companion project
> that addresses all of those gentoo_centric issues could compliment
> JFFNMS and simultaneously created that quintessential opportunity
> for Gentoo to really shine, compared to it's competition.
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> --
> gentoo-user@g.o mailing list
>
>

I think I like your idea better, about distributing binaries.  Do you know
if something like this is being worked on?  I'm certain that a common method
to this, like what you're saying, would allow Gentoo to become scalable to
the point of being easily usable on a large scale.