Re: [gentoo-user] ansible daemon

[Alan McKinnon]

On 18/11/2017 23:36, Damo Brisbane wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I am wanting to have continuously running ansible daemon to push out
> desired state to some servers. I do not see such functionally covered
> within readme (https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Ansible). Am I correct to
> assume that if I want to run ansible as a daemon, I will have to set up
> [if I want] *ansible user*, init.d/ansible rc script? 
> 
> Also note I haven't used Ansible in production - I am assuming that
> running as a daemon is best for this scenario.


You assume wrong. Ansible is not a daemon, it does not listen and cannot
be a daemon. When you need ansible to do something, you give it a play
to run and it does it. Then the play ends and the command quits. There
isn't really much scope for having ansible "continuously run", it does
not know when you have changed things that need updating - only you know
that.

I think you want Tower or AWX or even rundeck, those are
scheduling/controlling/orchestration wrappers that can fire off ansible
jobs.
As a last resort you can always add a cron to run an overall site.yml
play every X hours or so


Are you coming from a puppet/salt/chef world? If so, the one thing to
always keep in mind is this:

Ansible is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike Puppet.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

[gentoo-user] ansible daemon

[Damo Brisbane]

Hi,

I am wanting to have continuously running ansible daemon to push out
desired state to some servers. I do not see such functionally covered
within readme (https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Ansible). Am I correct to
assume that if I want to run ansible as a daemon, I will have to set up [if
I want] *ansible user*, init.d/ansible rc script?

Also note I haven't used Ansible in production - I am assuming that running
as a daemon is best for this scenario.

Thank you
Damon

Re: [gentoo-user] scope of user patches via epatch

[Dale]

Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> Is there any way to make the patches under /etc/portage/patches
> applicable to more than a single exact version of each package?  Right
> now, every time I emerge -u I have to check if I have patches for a
> package on the updated list, and if so make a new subdirectory for the
> new version and copy or link the patches there [1].  This is a chore I
> could live without.  So my question is if there's any wildcard mechanism
> to match multiple versions.
>
> [1] Some fail to apply of course but that's ok, still less work to see
> which ones fail than to try checking separately each patch if it applies
> or not.
>

Unless I want it to apply only to a specific version, I don't use
versions.  This is a example of how the directory/files are for a patch
that allows kwrite to run as root. 

/etc/portage/patches/kde-apps/kwrite/allow-root.patch 

If I wanted it to apply to only one version, I could add that like you
do on yours.  Since you want yours to apply to all version like mine,
make yours look sort of like mine.  It works here so it should work for
you as well, if the patch works of course.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-) 

[gentoo-user] scope of user patches via epatch

[Ian Zimmerman]

Is there any way to make the patches under /etc/portage/patches
applicable to more than a single exact version of each package?  Right
now, every time I emerge -u I have to check if I have patches for a
package on the updated list, and if so make a new subdirectory for the
new version and copy or link the patches there [1].  This is a chore I
could live without.  So my question is if there's any wildcard mechanism
to match multiple versions.

[1] Some fail to apply of course but that's ok, still less work to see
which ones fail than to try checking separately each patch if it applies
or not.

-- 
Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
To reply privately _only_ on Usenet, fetch the TXT record for the domain.

Re: [gentoo-user] Removing Firefox "Pocket" (Built-In Adware)

[Lex Luthor]

Have you considered IceCat, R0bot01? It is free from adware.

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Floyd Anderson  wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 02:30:52 +
> R0b0t1  wrote:
>
>>
>> I would like to know if there is any recourse. I have disabled it, but
>> it is still present in the menus. It looks like it generates a unique
>> advertising ID, which I have cleared in "about:config."
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> since I felt losing and wasting lifetime hunting for a suitable solution
> to configure those ‘features’, I switched to the aggressive route. This
> means, all things in ‘/usr/lib/firefox/browser/features/’, I cannot find
> easily a satisfiable explanation for, will be renamed.
>
> In your case it seems to be the extension ‘fire...@getpocket.com.xpi’.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> floyd
>
>
>