On 26/01/2010 15:42, Tim Cutts wrote:
>
> On 26 Jan 2010, at 2:25 pm, Mark Burgess wrote:
>
>>
>> This seems reasonable. I am spoiled using zypper which does this
>> automatically.
>
> It's arguable that apt's separation of the two functions is sensible. I
> have more than 2000 machines; and have already once been blacklisted by
> one apt repository site for hammering their repository - this despite
> the fact that I was going through a web proxy, but this site didn't like
> even a couple of dozen checks a day from the web proxy!
>
> By having the functionality separate, you can have the update much less
> frequent than you actually check whether the machine's packages are up
> to date. That way, I limit the machines to getting update package lists
> to only once a day, by using ifelapsed, but they can still use apt any
> number of other times in the day without bothering the upstream sites
> unnecessarily.

Agreed: the two functions should be kept separate, in my opinion. 
Interesting discussion :-)

It is nice to be able to limit the frequency of updates (ie, via 
ifelapsed, if one has a separate promise in a "commands" section).

I think it would also be nice to make the apt package_method from the 
standard library "self-sufficient", so that a simple call to it to 
upgrade packages will do aptitude update automatically. Of course, this 
feature, if added, must be able to be configured (to a maximum 
frequency, ie 3600 seconds) or disabled (for folks to use their own 
promise in "commands" section.

Maybe two new parameters :
package_list_update_command => "/usr/bin/aptitude update"
package_list_update_ifelapsed => 60
?

Jonathan
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Clarke - jonat...@phillipoux.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ldap Synchronization Connector (LSC) - http://lsc-project.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Help-cfengine mailing list
Help-cfengine@cfengine.org
https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine

Reply via email to