On Saturday 08 February 2003 06:46 am, you wrote:
> This is a magnificent idea.  I started having trouble with the multiple rpm
> database situation about a year ago and posted it to this list.  Looks like
> the situation hasn't changed much since then.  If we could just have rpm
> search one shared global rpm database and one local rpm database (with all
> local updates being added to the local database and the global database
> being the local database for the master server), that would solve all my
> problems.
>
> The only problem I can see is getting Red Hat to create and implement the
> new standard.  rpm does, after all, stand for "RedHat Package Manaager".

Well, someone could code it and post it at sourceforge, unc or some other 
Linux/Free/Open Source Software site, and wait until Red Hat wakes up and 
smells the coffee.

Even they can't argue with satisfied customers.

Wesley Parish

>
> They say there are three signs of stress in your life.  You eat too much
> junk food, you drive too fast and you veg out in front of the TV.  Who are
> they kidding?  That sounds like a perfect day to me! Gordon Wolfe, Ph.D.
> (425)865-5940
> VM & Linux Servers and Storage, The Boeing Company
>
> > ----------
> > From:         Scully, William
> > Reply To:     Linux on 390 Port
> > Sent:         Friday, February 7, 2003 6:34 AM
> > To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:      Re: RPM Data Bases and Sharing Linux Disks
> >
> > Richard,
> >
> > Valuable information, thank you!  I'm going to discuss this further, if
> > you don't mind.  After all, a main selling point of Linux on the
> > mainframe is leveraging the time and skill of our administrators.  If we
> > don't find ways of sharing packages we install among members of the Linux
> > farm then we're not likely to make as much progress in this area as we
> > could!
> >
> >
> > Imagine how nice it would be if RPM had a "hierarchy of data bases" in
> > which it searched for prerequisites and co-requisites.  When creating
> > large farms of servers the so-called "master RPM data base" would have
> > all the information about all the distributor-supplied packages which
> > were installed on the system, plus any security patches which were
> > recently applied.  Then each individual server in the farm, which used
> > the master server's disks in R/O, would be able to see that:
> >
> > - a package was installed already.  That's good, no need to waste disk
> > space reinstalling. - a package was serviced.  That's good, all the
> > needed security patches are installed too!
> >
> > This is a big selling point for running Linux on mainframes!  Do the work
> > once and leverage it over and over again.
> >
> > However, each server in the farm has unique needs.  So each user (owner)
> > will want to install add-ons as needed.  RPM would, in my scheme, keep a
> > second data base updated (let's call it the "user's RPM data base"). 
> > Because RPM searches the master DB first and the user DB second, the tool
> > still knows what's installed and most importantly, when things are
> > refreshed.  Certainly I could have given each server a copy of the
> > original RPM data base, but over time that get's "stale", as it doesn't
> > know about any patches recently installed.
> >
> > I can imagine that there could be times that installing a new level of
> > (for example) Apache might imply that other packages have to be updated,
> > in lock-step.  (IE: when Apache isn't backward compatible.  Perhaps an
> > unlikely example, but let's go with it.)  And that could mean that me, as
> > owner of the master RPM data base and R/O disks need to take special
> > effort to help my users prepare for upgrades.  I think that could be
> > handled.
> >
> > Does this sound like a helpful idea?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Hitt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 5:15 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: RPM Data Bases and Sharing Linux Disks
> >
> >
> > Hi, William
> >
> > The rpm database is nominally in /var/lib/rpm, if I'm not mistaken.  An
> > unprivileged user should trivially be able to change this to his own
> > directory, by making a ~/.rpmmacros file and adding to it a %_dbpath
> > value.  See /usr/lib/rpm/macros, in which you'll find:
> >         %_dbpath        ${_var}/lib/rpm
> >
> > That said, I don't at all see that the two rpm databases (the system's>
> > and an unprivileged user's) could possibly share information, but at
> > least now you know where rpm configuration parameters reside and how you
> > can override them.
> >
> > Richard Hitt   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Scully, William wrote:
> > >I apologize for the long note.  But this topic may be of particular
> > > interest to those of you hoping to create vast "farms" of Linux
> > > servers.  And of particular interest if you hope to manage the software
> > > on these farms effectively.
> > >
> > >I've been reviewing the excellent document Linux on IBM eServer zSeries
> > > and S/390: Large Scale Linux Deployment, SG24-6824-00, in the hopes of
> > > using some of the techniques described there to create a farm of
> > > servers which share the maximum amount of directories in R/O mode.  One
> > > objective is to allow an owner of a Linux server to install a package,
> > > using RPM, on their own server.  Perhaps a copy of our
> > > locally-developed software; perhaps something the user needs or wants
> > > that they found on the Internet.  Another objective is to be able to
> > > have me (or one of my peers) install security fixes or upgrade packages
> > > once, and see those updates on all the other servers.
> > >
> > >It seems in order to update a package that I'll need to keep strict R/W
> > > control over the RPM data base.  After all that's how I know what's
> > > installed and what's been patched.  But if an end-user wants to install
> > > a package, they too will need to interrogate and update the RPM data
> > > base.  As I understand it there's only one RPM data base.
> > >
> > >This seems to be hard to solve.  The authors of the Red Book mentioned
> > > above suggests that SPEC files can be used to force (ask?) that a
> > > separate RPM data base be used.  That is, there would be one RPM data
> > > base for my work and another RPM data base for whatever the user did. 
> > > However this presumes that whomever is installing the package knows
> > > (probably) a lot more about the nuances of RPM than may be practical,
> > > in real life.
> > >
> > >What might make this easier to handle is the ability, somehow, to merge
> > > two RPM data bases.  Then, as I perform service on or added packages to
> > > the "base" Linux system, I would somehow "refresh" each user's copy of
> > > the RPM data base with what's current from mine.  (Let's gloss over
> > > some obvious gotcha's about this, like what if the user installed THE
> > > first, then I installed it; who's entry to keep?)  Does anyone know if
> > > this is possible (the merging of data bases)?
> > >
> > >Any other techniques you've found to be helpful would be appreciated, if
> > > you'd mention them here.
> > >
> > >William P. Scully
> > >Systems Programmer
> > >Computer Associates International, Inc
> > >2291 Wood Oak Drive
> > >Unit 5-29C
> > >Herndon, Virginia  20171
> > >
> > >Work:  +1 703 708 3976
> > >
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?"
You ask, "What is the most important thing?"
Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata."
I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people."

Reply via email to