On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 02:45:51PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:06:46 +0200
> Michael Scherer <m...@zarb.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 01:26:28PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > This one I am not sure about how best to handle. 
> > > 
> > > If we simply apply this and run it we have the modified service
> > > files still around. Perhaps we could do this in 2 steps? Replace
> > > the service file with the one from the package, then after
> > > everyplace is updated, remove that?  
> >  
> > > Or I suppose we could reinstall the package, but that might cause
> > > other issues. 
> > > 
> > > kevin  
> > 
> > IIRC, the config in /usr is less prioritary than the one in /etc, so
> > keeping the old one in /usr should not cause any issues, and will
> > solve itself with next package upgrade or reinstallation of the
> > server. 
> > 
> > Since that's for fedmsg-gateway, i suspect that we will one day
> > commit code to it and upgrade anyway.
> 
> Well, I don't like the idea of the machines being in a state thats not
> described by the playbooks. Sure, it will go back on upgrade, just rubs
> me the wrong way. ;) 

So, since the fix is just yum reinstall of the package, we can either do that
with a adhoc run, a playbook or adding code to the role. I am not keen on adding
code to git just for a 1 off task and remove it just after, but if you think 
that's
better, i can add it.

-- 
Michael Scherer 
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to