Gah! Just noticed you said you've got 50 servers. Don't bother.
It's not worth the expense or the hassle. 500 servers? 5,000
servers? Completely different story.
Gajillion wrote:
> Thought I'd chime in here since most of these comments seem to be
> negative. This is the second organization
Thought I'd chime in here since most of these comments seem to be
negative. This is the second organization I've worked at using
Satellite. It has some issues, but it has also saved me countless
hours of work. It is NOT a configuration management tool, that was
never its intent. There is a cob
> how do you then download *all* the packages installed on the 400 or so
> servers from redhat, to seed your local repo ?
https://rhn.redhat.com/rhn/software/downloads/SupportedISOs.do
You can download the DVD images of the releases and loopback-mount them
somewhere under apache's DocumentRoot
I've deleted some of the earlier postings on this subject so I'm not sure if
this has already been mentioned but the open source alternative to RHN is
spacewalk which could be worth considering,
https://fedorahosted.org/spacewalk/
Rgds
Paul
2009/3/14 Trevor Vaughan
>
> Mrepo: http://dag.wieers.
Mrepo: http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/mrepo/
Don't forget that, if you're using Red Hat's updates, you still need
to have a license for each system that you're updating.
Trevor
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 21:07, Sam Abed wrote:
> how do you then download *all* the packages installed on the 400 or
Sam Abed wrote:
> how do you then download *all* the packages installed on the 400 or so
> servers from redhat, to seed your local repo ?
This OTN article from Oracle on creating a local repository from ULN
could probably be modified fairly easily to be used with RHEL.
http://www.oracle.com/t
how do you then download *all* the packages installed on the 400 or so
servers from redhat, to seed your local repo ?
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Ohad Levy wrote:
> I would argue that a one time effort to get proper repo locally, would be
> much more efficient than using a tool like RHN Sate
> Did a POC of it at my current company. I've also had the RedHat
> Enterprise Deployment and Virtualization class.
>
> This product was originally envisioned began development before RedHat
> even had an IPO. The reason I mention this is that the mindset around
> systems management at that tim
Did a POC of it at my current company. I've also had the RedHat
Enterprise Deployment and Virtualization class.
This product was originally envisioned began development before RedHat
even had an IPO. The reason I mention this is that the mindset around
systems management at that time is what yo
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> PeterBurkholder writes:
>
>> My boss has RedHat coming in on Tuesday to give a spiel on RHN
>> Satellite. I'm dubious, as it seems mostly like a web UI wrapped around
>> a Yum repository system and a half-baked configuration management
>>
PeterBurkholder writes:
> FWIW, we'll be looking about 50 systems that need to be
> managed, and we may not have to pay for server itself ($13.5K) just
> for the system subscriptions ($200 each).
Note that the Satellite server code has been open sourced so I'm not
sure why they still charge so
>From my fairly limited experience there is some functionality in Satellite
servers that takes it beyond local repositories in that you can group hosts
into channels (dev, test, prod etc) and apply changes specific to the
channel
>From the satellite server you can also fire back commands to a host
I've used it somewhat and it's great when it works, painful when it
doesn't (re: PAIN), but it's sort of beastly for only 50 boxes IMO.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To post t
PAIN.
PAIN.
PAIN.
That's my experience with RHN Satellite server.
PAIN.
On Mar 8, 2009, at 10:37 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> PeterBurkholder writes:
>
>> My boss has RedHat coming in on Tuesday to give a spiel on RHN
>> Satellite. I'm dubious, as it seems mostly like a web UI wrapped
>>
I would argue that a one time effort to get proper repo locally, would be
much more efficient than using a tool like RHN Satellite.
this way you control the content of your repository.
additionally, I would really recommend against having multiple tools
managing your systems.
my 2c
Ohad
On Mon, M
PeterBurkholder writes:
> My boss has RedHat coming in on Tuesday to give a spiel on RHN
> Satellite. I'm dubious, as it seems mostly like a web UI wrapped around
> a Yum repository system and a half-baked configuration management
> system. I'm of the opinion that our time and money would be b
16 matches
Mail list logo
