2017-05-06 3:00 GMT+02:00 Mark Waite <mark.earl.wa...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 10:28:38 AM UTC-6, Zero point minus two wrote:
>>
>> What are best practices for having a repo that feeds into system
>> configuration?
>>
>>
> The "etckeeper" program available on some Linux distributions places the
> git repository in the system configuration directory. In that case, it is
> not feeding the system configuration, but recording the actual state of the
> system configuration.
>
> I don't see the use case for having a repo which feeds system
> configuration and which wouldn't be better served by a tool specifically
> designed for system configuration, like puppet, chef, or ansible. Have you
> considered those tools for system configuration, since they are
> specifically designed to configure systems?
>
Those tools seem to be highly complex and large-scale. Previously someone
told me on a different note that he wouldn't use any of those tools for
less than a hundred servers or something of the kind.
The problem with a git repo in /etc as I said is that Git is not very
reliable in terms of user experience :p. User error can lead to data loss
so for backup purposes it is not very good. I read the tutorial on
etckeeper.
As you say it is only meant for recording although it can be used for
backups...
But it also warns against checkouts ("you probably don't want to do that")
;-).
Git is just not shielded enough for me to want to trust it with everything,
although I am doing some of that now on other systems in lesser degree.
I mean sometimes I will let the system link directly into the git
repository for a system file, other times I create a copy on the system
proper.
Because Git likes to change its worktree when you checkout.... or switch
branches....
You can't work on something and use it for production at the same time
unless you would create a secondary repo on the same system.
Then you would work, push and then pull on the first repo or something of
the kind. Or push directly towards it.
But a push is not yet a checkout, so you'd have to then checkout in the
"fixed" repo.
But I'd rather not have multiple copies of something on the same system.
Only adds to confusion.
I think I need a better "Make" system for installing into fixed
configuration locations. Then the only burden to having to install the
copies is to run some "make install" command or similar.
I think that would be the most agreeable thing for me, thank you.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
