Hi,
I think "pulp-admin rpm repo remove rpm" does not work at all.
-> I commented Christina's Bugreport.
I want to use pulp in (almost) the same way, that Christina described in
her mail from Aug 6th, which is hardly possible, if I cannot delete
obsolete content from repositories.
best regards,
florian
Am 02.12.2013 20:24, schrieb Christina Plummer:
--
!!! ACHTUNG !!!
Die elektronische DKIM-Signatur die der absendende Mailserver der
Nachricht beigefügt hat, ist Fehlerhaft. Es handelt sich bei dieser
Mail mit großer Wahrscheinlichkeit um eine Faelschung/Spam etc.
mx3-phx2.redhat.com ist nicht vertrauenswuerdig!
--
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] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanks; I added some comments to the bug.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Mike McCune <[email protected]
<mailto:[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]>
<mailto:[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]>
<mailto:[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]>
<mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
_______________________________________________
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
