On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 4:40 PM Mike Castle wrote:
> Thanks for all of the commentary so far.
>
> Once I get something working, I will *try* to remember to follow up
> here with what I've managed to cobble together.
I have done quite a bit of research and experimentation and finally
settled on a
Mike Castle writes:
Hah!
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/08/msg00042.html
Yes, that was me > 10a ago. Transitioning from these scripts to ant allowed
came with a few improvements:
* I switched all package building to `debuild` in favor of using more
low-level tools for `raw`
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 04:40:24PM -0700, Mike Castle wrote:
> Like Alex, one of my physical machines is a laptop that is not always
> on the home network. Though I'm usually connected to *something*.
> I'm still debating whether to bother with a VPN or trying something
> like a tailnet.
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024, Mike Castle wrote:
Now, I would like to expand that into also setting up various config
files that I currently do manually, for example, the `/etc/apt/*`
configs I need to make the above work. For a single set of files,
manual isn't bad, but as I want to get into setting
Hah!
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/08/msg00042.html
On 21/04/2024 08:40, Mike Castle wrote:
One thing Linux-Fan mentioned was `config-package-dev`. In my OP, I
commented about ``slightly old to really old tools'', and that was one
I was thinking of. It looks like it hasn't been touched in seven
years, and I wasn't sure if it still worked. But
Thanks for all the suggestions so far.
Like Alex, one of my physical machines is a laptop that is not always
on the home network. Though I'm usually connected to *something*.
I'm still debating whether to bother with a VPN or trying something
like a tailnet.
Heck, before I adopted Debian and
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 05:05:14PM -0700, Mike Castle wrote:
> Anyway, suggestions based upon actually experience would be appreciated.
As others have mentioned, Ansible can be a good choice for as little
as one machine as long as you don't object to installing Python and
a bunch of Python
Mike Castle writes:
For a while now, I've been using `equivs-build` for maintaining a
hierarchy of metapackages to control what is installed on my various
machines. Generally, I can do `apt install mrc-$(hostname -s)` and
I'm golden.
Now, I would like to expand that into also setting up
Hi,
> > and so on, it is time to explore solutions. I only have four systems
> > at the moment (two physical and two virtual), so I don't think I need
> > something too fancy.
I am in the same situation with an extra constraint: some are laptops
and not always connected.
> > My first thought
Mike Castle wrote:
> and so on, it is time to explore solutions. I only have four systems
> at the moment (two physical and two virtual), so I don't think I need
> something too fancy.
>
> My first thought was to simply add a `Files:` section to *.control
> files I use for my metapackages.
For a while now, I've been using `equivs-build` for maintaining a
hierarchy of metapackages to control what is installed on my various
machines. Generally, I can do `apt install mrc-$(hostname -s)` and
I'm golden.
Now, I would like to expand that into also setting up various config
files that I
12 matches
Mail list logo
