Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Managing multiple systems with identical hardware

2013-09-29 Thread Grant
 I'm slowly coming to conclsuion that you are trying to solve a problem
 with Gentoo that binary distros already solved a very long time ago. You
 are forcing yourself to become the sole maintainer of GrantOS and do all
 the heavy lifting of packaging. But, Mint and friends already did all
 that work already and frankly, they are much better at it than you or I.

  I think it will work if I can find a way to manage the few differences
  above.  Am I overlooking any potential issues?

 I think Grant Should look at CFengine, if he is not familar
 with it. It is the traditional 800 pound Gorrilla when it comes
 to managing many systems. Surely there are folks there in those
 forums that can help Grant filter his ideas until they are
 ready for action. CFengine is in portage.

 Alan may be right, as CFengine (or whatever) may work better
 with a binary distribution and is probable more tightly integrated
 with something like debian or such OSes.

Can you give me a general idea of how my workflow might be with a
solution like that?

- Grant



Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Managing multiple systems with identical hardware

2013-09-29 Thread Alan McKinnon
On 29/09/2013 20:36, Grant wrote:
 I'm slowly coming to conclsuion that you are trying to solve a problem
 with Gentoo that binary distros already solved a very long time ago. You
 are forcing yourself to become the sole maintainer of GrantOS and do all
 the heavy lifting of packaging. But, Mint and friends already did all
 that work already and frankly, they are much better at it than you or I.

 I think it will work if I can find a way to manage the few differences
 above.  Am I overlooking any potential issues?

 I think Grant Should look at CFengine, if he is not familar
 with it. It is the traditional 800 pound Gorrilla when it comes
 to managing many systems. Surely there are folks there in those
 forums that can help Grant filter his ideas until they are
 ready for action. CFengine is in portage.

 Alan may be right, as CFengine (or whatever) may work better
 with a binary distribution and is probable more tightly integrated
 with something like debian or such OSes.
 
 Can you give me a general idea of how my workflow might be with a
 solution like that?


It's not really possible to give a cut and dried answer to that, as all
three solutions (CFEngine, Puppet, Chef) try hard to integrate
themselves into your needs rather than get you to integrate into a rigid
code-imposed system.

I could say that you load a config into Puppet, define how it works and
where it must go, then tell puppet to do it and let you know the
results, but that doesn't tell you much.

I reckon you should pop over to puppet's website and start reading. As
you grasp the general ideas you'll find ways to make it work for you.




-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com




[gentoo-user] Re: Managing multiple systems with identical hardware

2013-09-27 Thread James
Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon at gmail.com writes:


 I'm slowly coming to conclsuion that you are trying to solve a problem
 with Gentoo that binary distros already solved a very long time ago. You
 are forcing yourself to become the sole maintainer of GrantOS and do all
 the heavy lifting of packaging. But, Mint and friends already did all
 that work already and frankly, they are much better at it than you or I.

  I think it will work if I can find a way to manage the few differences
  above.  Am I overlooking any potential issues?

I think Grant Should look at CFengine, if he is not familar
with it. It is the traditional 800 pound Gorrilla when it comes
to managing many systems. Surely there are folks there in those
forums that can help Grant filter his ideas until they are
ready for action. CFengine is in portage.

Alan may be right, as CFengine (or whatever) may work better
with a binary distribution and is probable more tightly integrated
with something like debian or such OSes.

hth,
James