Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
> > It'd be nice if you added it to the AUR. > > M > After I roll out this update, that's on my list of stuff to figure out :). I have never created an AUR package, doesn't sound to difficult. Squall -- Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That's why its called the present. Headmaster Squall :: The Wired/Section-9 Close the world txen eht nepo $3R14L 3XP3R1M3NT$ #L41N http://twitter.com/headmastersqual
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On 06/20/12 at 09:28am, Squall Lionheart wrote: > Your welcome. I will post a message to everyone when I roll out my next > version since it's a huge improvement over the current one with a lot of > very powerful and user friendly features, as well as efficiency > improvements. > It'd be nice if you added it to the AUR. M
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
Squall, very nice work going to give this a shot later today on a test box. Thanks for pointing this out. I tried a few things in suggestions to my OP but this seems to be the best so far. Thanks for bringing this back up > > > Your welcome. I will post a message to everyone when I roll out my next version since it's a huge improvement over the current one with a lot of very powerful and user friendly features, as well as efficiency improvements. Enjoy -- Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That's why its called the present. Headmaster Squall :: The Wired/Section-9 Close the world txen eht nepo $3R14L 3XP3R1M3NT$ #L41N http://twitter.com/headmastersqual
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On 06/20/2012 07:46 AM, Squall Lionheart wrote: I wrote a system backup program called "mime" that works similar to Apple's Time Machine on the back end. Basically each time you backup your system, another copy of your file system is available. Another program is installed with it called "lsmime" which is used to list, restore and view information about files that are backed up. The new version I am about to release even has the ability to view a diff on a particular file against any version that is in your backups. The features available give the feel of having your entire file system under version control. The version on the site is functional and we have been using it on our servers and work stations for years. I will have a new version available in a few weeks. The current version can be downloaded here from the link below. If you end up using it, I greatly appreciate any feedback you can provide. In regards to your original question, I don't know what is considered the "Arch" way of doing this, however I run Arch at work and at home and is backed up using mime on a daily or weekly frequency (this has saved my butt more than once). http://code.google.com/p/mime-backup/ Thank you Squall Squall, very nice work going to give this a shot later today on a test box. Thanks for pointing this out. I tried a few things in suggestions to my OP but this seems to be the best so far. Thanks for bringing this back up
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
I wrote a system backup program called "mime" that works similar to Apple's Time Machine on the back end. Basically each time you backup your system, another copy of your file system is available. Another program is installed with it called "lsmime" which is used to list, restore and view information about files that are backed up. The new version I am about to release even has the ability to view a diff on a particular file against any version that is in your backups. The features available give the feel of having your entire file system under version control. The version on the site is functional and we have been using it on our servers and work stations for years. I will have a new version available in a few weeks. The current version can be downloaded here from the link below. If you end up using it, I greatly appreciate any feedback you can provide. In regards to your original question, I don't know what is considered the "Arch" way of doing this, however I run Arch at work and at home and is backed up using mime on a daily or weekly frequency (this has saved my butt more than once). http://code.google.com/p/mime-backup/ Thank you Squall
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:43:58 +0100 Dennis Börm wrote: > we're using > > http://joey.kitenet.net/code/etckeeper/ > > for that purpose I see it's available via AUR, but, afaik, it does not support Arch's pacman due to lack of hook support in Pacman. Can you share some light how do you use etckeeper on Arch? I'd probably use it with bzr (treeless repo + lightweight checkout). Sincerely, Gour -- As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On 02/23/2012 08:43 AM, Dennis Börm wrote: On 02/23/2012 05:36 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: Alfredo Palhares, Thu 2012-02-23 @ 17:24:01+0100: Excerpts from Matthew Monaco's message of Thu Feb 23 17:08:46 +0100 2012: What about permissions and ownership? These are pretty important for /etc. What about those ? Git doesn't care about permissions, the only permissions that git stores is the executable bit. But that's problematic for files in /etc, many of which require specific ownership or mode bits set/unset. You don't want your VCS to elide the fact that /etc/shadow should only be readable by root, for instance. I don't think Git will change permissions on existing files in your working directory, but if you ever cloned your /etc repo onto another machine, the permissions would be screwed up. Hi we're using http://joey.kitenet.net/code/etckeeper/ for that purpose greets, Dennis Have you had any issues? The AUR packages for that are way out of date and probably abandoned by the owners. From what I read it starting giving people issues when pacman 3 came out and now that we are on 4 with even more features I would think a bunch of work would have to be done to make work properly for Arch.
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On 02/23/2012 08:56 AM, Alfredo Palhares wrote: Excerpts from Taylor Hedberg's message of Thu Feb 23 17:36:00 +0100 2012: But that's problematic for files in /etc, many of which require specific ownership or mode bits set/unset. You don't want your VCS to elide the fact that /etc/shadow should only be readable by root, for instance. I don't think Git will change permissions on existing files in your working directory, but if you ever cloned your /etc repo onto another machine, the permissions would be screwed up. Yeah i agree, you should have carefull with that. I never transplant a the /etc of a machine i only use it as detailed backup. Whenever i have another machine i create a new /etc repository for it, copying manually the files i need because i dont even want the history back. You could do it with git using root and those files would be owned by root, you just need to adjust the ownerwhip like you set when you copy a file manually. In my home repo i do that and keep a branch for each computer, but on /etc repos not just because they often have very diferent distros and objectives. Hey thanks again everyone I am going to start trying out both methods and see which I feel works best for me and will post which way I go.
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
Excerpts from Taylor Hedberg's message of Thu Feb 23 17:36:00 +0100 2012: > But that's problematic for files in /etc, many of which require specific > ownership or mode bits set/unset. You don't want your VCS to elide the > fact that /etc/shadow should only be readable by root, for instance. > > I don't think Git will change permissions on existing files in your > working directory, but if you ever cloned your /etc repo onto another > machine, the permissions would be screwed up. Yeah i agree, you should have carefull with that. I never transplant a the /etc of a machine i only use it as detailed backup. Whenever i have another machine i create a new /etc repository for it, copying manually the files i need because i dont even want the history back. You could do it with git using root and those files would be owned by root, you just need to adjust the ownerwhip like you set when you copy a file manually. In my home repo i do that and keep a branch for each computer, but on /etc repos not just because they often have very diferent distros and objectives.
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On 02/23/2012 05:36 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: > Alfredo Palhares, Thu 2012-02-23 @ 17:24:01+0100: >> Excerpts from Matthew Monaco's message of Thu Feb 23 17:08:46 +0100 >> 2012: >>> What about permissions and ownership? These are pretty important for >>> /etc. >> What about those ? Git doesn't care about permissions, the only >> permissions that git stores is the executable bit. > > But that's problematic for files in /etc, many of which require specific > ownership or mode bits set/unset. You don't want your VCS to elide the > fact that /etc/shadow should only be readable by root, for instance. > > I don't think Git will change permissions on existing files in your > working directory, but if you ever cloned your /etc repo onto another > machine, the permissions would be screwed up. Hi we're using http://joey.kitenet.net/code/etckeeper/ for that purpose greets, Dennis
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
Alfredo Palhares, Thu 2012-02-23 @ 17:24:01+0100: > Excerpts from Matthew Monaco's message of Thu Feb 23 17:08:46 +0100 > 2012: > > What about permissions and ownership? These are pretty important for > > /etc. > What about those ? Git doesn't care about permissions, the only > permissions that git stores is the executable bit. But that's problematic for files in /etc, many of which require specific ownership or mode bits set/unset. You don't want your VCS to elide the fact that /etc/shadow should only be readable by root, for instance. I don't think Git will change permissions on existing files in your working directory, but if you ever cloned your /etc repo onto another machine, the permissions would be screwed up. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
Excerpts from Matthew Monaco's message of Thu Feb 23 17:08:46 +0100 2012: > What about permissions and ownership? These are pretty important for /etc. What about those ? Git doesn't care about permissions, the only permissions that git stores is the executable bit. -- Regards, Alfredo Palhares
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On 02/23/2012 12:48 AM, Alfredo Palhares wrote: > Hello Don, > > Excerpts from Don deJuan's message of Thu Feb 23 07:35:52 +0100 2012: >> What is considered the Arch way to have version control over the configs >> in /etc? I would like to be able to see at least a few changes back in >> my config history at the minimum. > > I too keep my /etc directory under version control. I have a a detached > worktree. > Wich enables me to have the .git directory outside of /etc. The process is > simple: > > You create a bare repo: > $ mkdir etc.git > $ git init --bare > Now lets congigure it to chek the files elsewhere: > $ git config core.worktree /etc > And export these vars to you current session > $ export GIT_DIR=/path/to/etc.git > $ export GIT_WORK_TREE=/etc > > Tip here a script[1] easy to work it. Just rember to run it with "." or > "source" > *not* with "sh" since it open another bash session and kills it when script > is done. > > Now you would be able to git add and git commit in your etc while keeping it > clean. :) > >> I have seen the package etckeeper and it does not seem to really fully >> be setup to work with pacman. Both AUR packages are very outdated. > etckeeper doesn't really fit pacman cause pacman doesn't merge files > automatically, only > apt does that (if you silly enough to configure it to do that :p ). Also > etckeeper commits > all the files in /etc wich makes quite dummy commits. They not really > resetable... > I use use it on debian server only as the last resource. > > The Arch way is quite simpler, every time you merge a pacnew or add a feature > to a config file > you commit it and keep the same workflow as a normal code repo. Much simpler. > >> Would I just be best off just copying the ones I change and then push >> the changes to a separate dir that is under control of say git? What >> methods do you employ? > Well this is kinda hard to do (believe me i tried) Also having the .git on > /etc and other dirs like > $HOME is quite anoying since i get the (branch) in red on my bash prompt[2]. > > I hope this can help you. > > [1] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/scripts/export_git.sh > [2] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/.bashrc > What about permissions and ownership? These are pretty important for /etc.
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
Excerpts from solsTiCe d'Hiver's message of Thu Feb 23 11:55:11 +0100 2012: > "git config core.worktree /etc" is not really needed in your setup True. > I would like to suggest to use alias instead of env var. This way you > can work easily on multiple git repo in the same shell > > for example > alias etc-git='git --git-dir=/path/to/etc.git --work-dir=/etc' > alias home-git='git --git-dir=/path/to/home.git --work-dir=$HOME' #just > check that $HOME is defined This is nice, i used this for a while, but i got used to my git aliases[1] (eg gc="git commit") that i always failed the commands :P So i just use this little scrpit[2] Either way is very cool indeed. [1] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/.bash.d/aliases.bash [2] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/scripts/export_git.sh
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
Le jeudi 23 février 2012 à 08:48 +0100, Alfredo Palhares a écrit : > Hello Don, > You create a bare repo: > $ mkdir etc.git > $ git init --bare > Now lets congigure it to chek the files elsewhere: > $ git config core.worktree /etc > And export these vars to you current session > $ export GIT_DIR=/path/to/etc.git > $ export GIT_WORK_TREE=/etc hi all, "git config core.worktree /etc" is not really needed in your setup I would like to suggest to use alias instead of env var. This way you can work easily on multiple git repo in the same shell for example alias etc-git='git --git-dir=/path/to/etc.git --work-dir=/etc' alias home-git='git --git-dir=/path/to/home.git --work-dir=$HOME' #just check that $HOME is defined and run etc-git add /etc/pacman.conf etc-git rc.conf home-git add anyfileinhome home-git commit -a etc-git commit -a place the aliases in your .bashrc or aliases file
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
On 02/22/2012 11:48 PM, Alfredo Palhares wrote: Hello Don, Excerpts from Don deJuan's message of Thu Feb 23 07:35:52 +0100 2012: What is considered the Arch way to have version control over the configs in /etc? I would like to be able to see at least a few changes back in my config history at the minimum. I too keep my /etc directory under version control. I have a a detached worktree. Wich enables me to have the .git directory outside of /etc. The process is simple: You create a bare repo: $ mkdir etc.git $ git init --bare Now lets congigure it to chek the files elsewhere: $ git config core.worktree /etc And export these vars to you current session $ export GIT_DIR=/path/to/etc.git $ export GIT_WORK_TREE=/etc Tip here a script[1] easy to work it. Just rember to run it with "." or "source" *not* with "sh" since it open another bash session and kills it when script is done. Now you would be able to git add and git commit in your etc while keeping it clean. :) I have seen the package etckeeper and it does not seem to really fully be setup to work with pacman. Both AUR packages are very outdated. etckeeper doesn't really fit pacman cause pacman doesn't merge files automatically, only apt does that (if you silly enough to configure it to do that :p ). Also etckeeper commits all the files in /etc wich makes quite dummy commits. They not really resetable... I use use it on debian server only as the last resource. The Arch way is quite simpler, every time you merge a pacnew or add a feature to a config file you commit it and keep the same workflow as a normal code repo. Much simpler. Would I just be best off just copying the ones I change and then push the changes to a separate dir that is under control of say git? What methods do you employ? Well this is kinda hard to do (believe me i tried) Also having the .git on /etc and other dirs like $HOME is quite anoying since i get the (branch) in red on my bash prompt[2]. I hope this can help you. [1] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/scripts/export_git.sh [2] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/.bashrc Awesome!! Thanks for that, I will have to read this throughly and give it a shot in the morning. I have read a few snips on detached worktree and was unsure if that was ideal for my want. I will post back if I have more questions and again thanks for the in depth answer :D
Re: [arch-general] Source control on /etc
Hello Don, Excerpts from Don deJuan's message of Thu Feb 23 07:35:52 +0100 2012: > What is considered the Arch way to have version control over the configs > in /etc? I would like to be able to see at least a few changes back in > my config history at the minimum. I too keep my /etc directory under version control. I have a a detached worktree. Wich enables me to have the .git directory outside of /etc. The process is simple: You create a bare repo: $ mkdir etc.git $ git init --bare Now lets congigure it to chek the files elsewhere: $ git config core.worktree /etc And export these vars to you current session $ export GIT_DIR=/path/to/etc.git $ export GIT_WORK_TREE=/etc Tip here a script[1] easy to work it. Just rember to run it with "." or "source" *not* with "sh" since it open another bash session and kills it when script is done. Now you would be able to git add and git commit in your etc while keeping it clean. :) > I have seen the package etckeeper and it does not seem to really fully > be setup to work with pacman. Both AUR packages are very outdated. etckeeper doesn't really fit pacman cause pacman doesn't merge files automatically, only apt does that (if you silly enough to configure it to do that :p ). Also etckeeper commits all the files in /etc wich makes quite dummy commits. They not really resetable... I use use it on debian server only as the last resource. The Arch way is quite simpler, every time you merge a pacnew or add a feature to a config file you commit it and keep the same workflow as a normal code repo. Much simpler. > Would I just be best off just copying the ones I change and then push > the changes to a separate dir that is under control of say git? What > methods do you employ? Well this is kinda hard to do (believe me i tried) Also having the .git on /etc and other dirs like $HOME is quite anoying since i get the (branch) in red on my bash prompt[2]. I hope this can help you. [1] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/scripts/export_git.sh [2] https://github.com/masterkorp/Home-files/blob/master/.bashrc -- Regards, Alfredo Palhares
[arch-general] Source control on /etc
What is considered the Arch way to have version control over the configs in /etc? I would like to be able to see at least a few changes back in my config history at the minimum. I have seen the package etckeeper and it does not seem to really fully be setup to work with pacman. Both AUR packages are very outdated. Would I just be best off just copying the ones I change and then push the changes to a separate dir that is under control of say git? What methods do you employ? Thanks for any info or tips on this. :)
