*Troy thinks out loud as well, though a little better rested than Erik* Hmmm .... Very interesting idea. So it COULD be sortof like a kickstart. A person could do a bare bare install, enough to have the kernel and yum installed. Then point their yum runscript at this file, and it would build it up to whatever they really want. (I'm just thinking of some of our people using 200Mhz Pentium Pro's. The installer sucks up so much memory these things take hours to do a minimal install. Though this is the exception, not the rule around here) *Troy stops thinking ... out loud at least* See below for further comments Erik Williamson wrote: > Seth, this is a great idea. > > I'm wondering: Whenever I rollout a new release, I'm constantly plagued > with "Awwww crap! forgot to install <group/package name>", or install > something, but later on down the road, no longer want that package on the > system (compile/install from source, etc). > > Thinking aloud, unwise at 6AM. > > Could this be used as a method to do a sort of 'system check'? Hmmm, almost > like the package selection in a kickstart config, but with removes, etc. It > would need to accept the fact that some (most) packages may already exist, > some that are tagged for removal may not be on the system... A sort of > 'template' for the system. It could be helpful for those of use whose > systems evolve a fair bit over the course of the roll-out. > > yum -c http://path/to/yum.conf -t http://path/to/yum.systemplate <action> > Yes ... but what if you could somehow get the template to point to it's own yum.conf, or even multiple yum.conf Or something like installgroup Groupname installgroup AnotherGroupname -c http://path/to/yum.conf updategroup Groupname remove pkgname install pkgname update pkgname -c http://path/to/yum.conf # comment ; comment The reason I say this is because I have no idea what our users yum.conf looks like. It might be the default that I sent out, or they might have modified it. This way, if I say 'point your yum at this file' they are going to get what I expect, and not some odd variation. > > I thought of something like this: > installgroup Groupname > updategroup Groupname > remove pkgname > install pkgname > update pkgname > # comment > ; comment > > one item per line > > but then I thought, that would make the file format maybe a touch too > similar to the commandline arguments and maybe confusing > so I thought - why not make it like %packages in ks.cfg > > Ideas on better syntax? > > I think xml might be a tad overkill for this operation. > > -sv I like the idea of the syntax being the same as the command line arguments. This way the user, or writer of the script, wouldn't have to remember new commands. They would know "installgroup" is the same as it is in the command line and wouldn't have to worry if "@groupname" means "installgroup groupname" or "updategroup groupname" Anyway ... just my two cents worth. Troy -- __________________________________________________ Troy Dawson dawson@xxxxxxxx (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/OSS CSI Group __________________________________________________
