[Pulp-list] Exclude packages or package groups from repo sync
Mike McCune
mmccune at redhat.com
Tue Oct 22 00:25:02 UTC 2013
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 <brian_lee1 at jabil.com
> <mailto:brian_lee1 at jabil.com>> 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
> <cplummer at gmail.com <mailto:cplummer at gmail.com>> 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
> <rbarlow at redhat.com <mailto:rbarlow at redhat.com>> 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
> Pulp-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>
More information about the Pulp-list
mailing list