Hi Mike, I also submitted *Bug 1034978*<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1034978>for the problem I had with not being able to remove source RPMs an existing repo. I wasn't able to find any other bugs for the issue.
Thanks, Christina On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Christina Plummer <[email protected]>wrote: > Thanks; I added some comments to the bug. > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Mike McCune <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I don't think any work has been done on it but more comments and >> justifications here: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1004001 >> >> will help prioritize and capture the requirements for the feature >> >> >> On 10/15/2013 09:22 AM, Christina Plummer wrote: >> >>> Any updates on this one? I am also looking for a way to avoid syncing >>> the source RPMs from the Oracle Linux upstream repo, as Brian mentioned. >>> >>> As a workaround, I tried removing the SRPMs from my repo following the >>> sync using " pulp-admin rpm repo remove srpm --repo-id=ol5-x86_64 -a >>> 20130901", but that had no effect (even though " pulp-admin rpm repo >>> content srpm --repo-id=ol5-x86_64 -a 20130901 " showed me the packages). >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Christina >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Brian Lee <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> I appreciate the responses. Here are some use cases that I can >>> imagine. >>> >>> - Users that don't require X Windows for any of their Linux systems >>> would prefer not to sync anything that depends on X Windows. These >>> could be excluded/blacklisted based on package names, simple pattern >>> matching, regex, or yum package groups. >>> >>> - Some repositories, such as OracleLinux >>> <http://public-yum.oracle.com/repo/OracleLinux/OL6/latest/x86_64/> >>> >>> include the *.src.rpm in the same repo directory, which makes >>> syncing the entire repository *much* larger. >>> >>> - Users that only want to sync a select few packages from a >>> repository, and exclude the rest. >>> >>> Thanks again, >>> Brian >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Christina Plummer >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am interested in this as well. I had read an interesting >>> USENIX paper[1] and slidedeck[2] last year about using Pulp to >>> manage yum repositories for enterprise environments, and had >>> hoped to implement something similar. However, it appears that >>> the features they depend on were only available in Pulp v1. >>> >>> The basic workflow is something like this: >>> 1) Sync all updates from upstream to "live" repo (probably daily) >>> 2) Sync all "non-impactful" updates from "live" (filter out >>> kernel and any other pkgs that we identify as needing more >>> testing) to "unstable" repo (probably weekly - so pkgs are 1 >>> week old before they appear) >>> 3) Sync all "non-impactful" updates from "unstable" after they >>> have been there for a certain time period (weekly or monthly) to >>> "stable" repo >>> 4) Don't point any servers to the "live" repo >>> 5) Point non-production servers to "unstable" repo >>> 6) Point production servers to "stable" repo >>> 7) Manually promote "impactful" packages to "unstable" for >>> testing >>> 8) Manually promote "impactful" packages to "stable" after >>> having been tested >>> >>> As best I can tell, the solution described in the paper is based >>> on "Sync filters", which don't seem to be available in Pulp v2. >>> So I think the only way to implement something like this would >>> be to use the "copy" feature, which I don't believe can be >>> scheduled. >>> >>> Is it possible to implement this sort of workflow in Pulp v2? >>> >>> Christina >>> >>> [1] >>> https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/lisa11/tech/full_ >>> papers/Pierre.pdf >>> [2] >>> https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/lisa11/tech/slides/ >>> pierre.pdf >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Randy Barlow >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue 06 Aug 2013 10:04:48 AM EDT, Brian Lee wrote: >>> > I believe in older versions of Pulp you could exclude >>> certain packages >>> > from being synced locally. However, I haven't encountered >>> the method >>> > for this in Pulp 2.1. To conserve disk space, it would be >>> nice if we >>> > could exclude packages that match a regex pattern or >>> belong to a >>> > package group. Let me know if I've just missed this option >>> in the >>> > documentation or if it's not currently supported. >>> >>> Hi Brian, >>> >>> We don't currently support this feature, but we have talked >>> about it >>> before and we are interested in the possibility of >>> supporting something >>> like this. It would be interesting to use to know your use >>> case, as >>> there is some difficulty in coming up with a nice way to >>> express what >>> should be included or excluded from the CLI. You mention >>> package >>> groups, which makes me also think of package categories. >>> Thanks for the >>> suggestion! >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pulp-list mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list >>> >>> >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
