On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:15:07 +1200 Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Steve Holdoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:54:09 +1200 (NZST) > > Derek Smithies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> yeah - which is what I did. Exported the centos files via a ftp server. > >> > >> Which is the point of my comment below. > >> - there are times when having a ftp server is useful and required. > >> - which is one of the annoyances of the Internet. > >> The original poster asked a reasonable question, > >> was told, no no no, don't do that, security is bad, > >> But the original poster's question is reasonable - as I illustrated > >> with my example. > >> > >> > >> Derek. > > > > But surely you'd set up your own rpm depository in that situation, and add > > to the config for each server. Then you have centralised package management > > and only one access to the internet to keep current. And you'd have control > > of the package versions released to all of your servers. > > > > Personally, I'd not use ftp for this, but yum. > > > > Steve > > At the install stage (which is the aim) you can't do that I believe. > Redhat and derivatives have always had network install, it just works > (but also would via http). Ah, sorry, misunderstood. Still, as I said in my original response, anonymous ftp would do this fine - the distinction I was making was between anonymous, unsecured access via ftp, and protected access via sftp, with no place for password protected ftp in the middle. TBH, for a problem like this, I'd suggest that kickstart is an easier solution. I'd use bootp/nfs to implement this, by preference. Steve -- Steve Holdoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
