[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: yum and indirect downgrades



On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 16:39 +0200, yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> What we are trying to do is manage a server farm through RPMs *only*,
> delivering all software and all config files to the server farm through
> RPMs which are automatically built from a SVN repository with all the
> neccessary information. Each server is personalized through a dedicated
> (per host) is24-config-$hostname RPM which contains all config files and
> dependencies to the software RPMs that should be installed on the
> server. In the end we use RPM dependencies to model our server farm and
> have a transactional representation of all our servers and their
> functions within the context of RPM.


This is most likely not a good idea. Rpm is just not instrumented to be
used this way and most rpms are not built to deal with configuration
like this.

You're much better off taking yum and combining it with a good config
management system: puppet, bcfg2 to name just a couple of them.



If you're looking at push-oriented tools then you might want to take a
look at func and something I've recently been working on func-yum.

-sv


_______________________________________________
Yum mailing list
Yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.baseurl.org/mailman/listinfo/yum


[Home]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Legacy List]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Red Hat 9 Bible]     [Fedora Bible]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

Powered by Linux

Google
  Web www.spinics.net