Fresh server install on RHEL5: source or yum repo?
list Xymon User in Richmond
I'm about to begin migrating a hobbit server on Centos5 to an RHEL5 server running xymon. Would like to hear any thoughts/advice on whether to do a source install or a yum repo install. I'm a package management advocate, so I lean toward the yum install, but package management depends on the actual packages in the repo being managed on an ongoing basis. I'd especially like to hear from Buchan M. and Neil F., since Buchan advised Neil about a year ago to do a yum installation.
list Buchan Milne
▸
On Tuesday, 27 July 2010 14:39:45 Xymon User in Richmond wrote:
I'm about to begin migrating a hobbit server on Centos5 to an RHEL5 server running xymon. Would like to hear any thoughts/advice on whether to do a source install or a yum repo install. I'm a package management advocate, so I lean toward the yum install, but package management depends on the actual packages in the repo being managed on an ongoing basis. I'd especially like to hear from Buchan M. and Neil F., since Buchan advised Neil about a year ago to do a yum installation.
What do you need to hear from me? https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/devmon/index.php?title=InstallRHELorCentOS As I am now more involved in the Xymon project itself now, I may try and improve matters further regarding packages, but I am not sure if it is possible to host a repo on SourceForge. Regards, Buchan
list Xymon User in Richmond
▸
On Tue, July 27, 2010 10:39, Buchan Milne wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 July 2010 14:39:45 Xymon User in Richmond wrote:I'm about to begin migrating a hobbit server on Centos5 to an RHEL5 server running xymon. Would like to hear any thoughts/advice on whether to do a source install or a yum repo install. I'm a package management advocate, so I lean toward the yum install, but package management depends on the actual packages in the repo being managed on an ongoing basis. I'd especially like to hear from Buchan M. and Neil F., since Buchan advised Neil about a year ago to do a yum installation.What do you need to hear from me?
https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/devmon/index.php?title=InstallRHEL orCentOS
▸
As I am now more involved in the Xymon project itself now, I may try and
improve matters further regarding packages, but I am not sure if it is
possible to host a repo on SourceForge.
Sorry, guess I should have elaborated. I wanted to hear if you'd give the same advice now as a year ago, and whether we could count on a Xymon rpm repo being maintained going forward. Looks like the answers are "yes" and "maybe". Given that some of the rpm-based file locations differ from those resulting from a source install, I'm now leaning toward installing from source. If the packages don't get maintained going forward, I'd end up having to migrate to source-based, and that would involve hand-tweaking the rpm-based locations. Thanks for stepping up to the primary project admin role. That's a lot of work. regards, j.
list Buchan Milne
▸
On Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:39:16 Xymon User in Richmond wrote:
On Tue, July 27, 2010 10:39, Buchan Milne wrote:On Tuesday, 27 July 2010 14:39:45 Xymon User in Richmond wrote:I'm about to begin migrating a hobbit server on Centos5 to an RHEL5 server running xymon. Would like to hear any thoughts/advice on whether to do a source install or a yum repo install. I'm a package management advocate, so I lean toward the yum install, but package management depends on the actual packages in the repo being managed on an ongoing basis. I'd especially like to hear from Buchan M. and Neil F., since Buchan advised Neil about a year ago to do a yum installation.What do you need to hear from me? https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/devmon/index.php?title=InstallRHEL orCentOS As I am now more involved in the Xymon project itself now, I may try and improve matters further regarding packages, but I am not sure if it is possible to host a repo on SourceForge.Sorry, guess I should have elaborated. I wanted to hear if you'd give the same advice now as a year ago, and whether we could count on a Xymon rpm repo being maintained going forward. Looks like the answers are "yes" and "maybe". Given that some of the rpm-based file locations differ from those resulting from a source install, I'm now leaning toward installing from source.
Some of the reasons to use packages are consistency with policies. For example, most distributions disallow packages from owning any files below /home, and require that operation of the software not require /usr to be writable at all times, and various other requirements. As such, logs cannot actually reside under the same parent directory as binaries. The packages provide symlinks to the real locations, so things look the same taking into account the difference in BBHOME.
▸
If the packages don't get maintained going forward, I'd end up having to migrate to source-based, and that would involve hand-tweaking the rpm-based locations.
Well, once I have more than one installation of software, I package it myself anyway, as maintaining a package becomes less work at about the 3rd installation. If I no longer maintain packages (although I do), that *really* doesn't mean that you would need to switch, you should consider rebuilding the SRPM ... Being an open-source project, there really isn't any "you have to" or "you can't", only a "am willing to" or "am not willing to". Regards, Buchan
list Xymon User in Richmond
▸
On Tue, July 27, 2010 11:58, Buchan Milne wrote:
Some of the reasons to use packages are consistency with policies. For example, most distributions disallow packages from owning any files below /home, and require that operation of the software not require /usr to be writable at all times, and various other requirements. As such, logs cannot actually reside under the same parent directory as binaries. The packages provide symlinks to the real locations, so things look the same taking into account the difference in BBHOME.If the packages don't get maintained going forward, I'd end up having to migrate to source-based, and that would involve hand-tweaking the rpm-based locations.Well, once I have more than one installation of software, I package it myself anyway, as maintaining a package becomes less work at about the 3rd installation. If I no longer maintain packages (although I do), that *really* doesn't mean that you would need to switch, you should consider rebuilding the SRPM ...
Good advice. Thanks for elaborating. BTW, re http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/devmon/index.php?title=InstallRHELorCentOS, yum reports "No package xymon.x86_64 available" when the "without yum-basearch-only" instructions are followed.
list Josh Luthman
I have always compiled, never used a package. I moved the main server about a year ago very pain free. Smokeping gave me waymore flak for moving. On Jul 27, 2010 12:16 PM, "Xymon User in Richmond" < user-24d6f8323faa@xymon.invalid> wrote: On Tue, July 27, 2010 11:58, Buchan Milne wrote:
Some of the reasons to use packages are consist...
▸
Good advice. Thanks for elaborating. BTW, re http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/devmon/index.php?title=InstallRHELorCentOS , yum reports "No package xymon.x86_64 available" when the "without yum-basearch-only" instructions are followed.
list Xymon User in Richmond
Ow, ow, ow! The yum install is broken when overlaid on hobbit and you end
up with pieces of both laying around.
===========================================================================================================================
Package Arch Version
Repository Size
===========================================================================================================================
Installing:
devmon noarch 0.3.0-1.rhel5
Hobbit 109 k
xymon i386 4.2.3-1.rhel5
Xymon 3.5 M
replacing hobbit.i386 4.2.0-1
Installing for dependencies:
xymon-client i386 4.2.3-1.rhel5
Xymon 325 k
Transaction Summary
===========================================================================================================================
Install 3 Package(s)
Upgrade 0 Package(s)
Total download size: 3.9 M
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Downloading Packages:
(1/3): devmon-0.3.0-1.rhel5.noarch.rpm
| 109 kB 00:00
(2/3): xymon-client-4.2.3-1.rhel5.i386.rpm
| 325 kB 00:00
(3/3): xymon-4.2.3-1.rhel5.i386.rpm
| 3.5 MB 00:00
Total
7.6 MB/s | 3.9 MB 00:00
Running rpm_check_debug
Running Transaction Test
Finished Transaction Test
Transaction Test Succeeded
Running Transaction
xymon user present
Adding user xymon to group adm
Installing : xymon-client
1/4
Error unpacking rpm package xymon-client-4.2.3-1.rhel5.i386
error: unpacking of archive failed on file /usr/lib/xymon/client/etc:
cpio: rename
Installing : devmon
2/4
Installing : xymon
3/4
Error unpacking rpm package xymon-4.2.3-1.rhel5.i386
warning: /etc/httpd/conf.d/hobbit-apache.conf created as
/etc/httpd/conf.d/hobbit-apache.conf.rpmnew
error: unpacking of archive failed on file /var/lib/xymon/www/gifs: cpio:
rename
Installed:
devmon.noarch 0:0.3.0-1.rhel5
Replaced:
hobbit.i386 0:4.2.0-1
Failed:
xymon.i386 0:4.2.3-1.rhel5
xymon-client.i386 0:4.2.3-1.rhel5
Complete!
list Japheth Cleaver
-----Original Message----- From: Xymon User in Richmond [mailto:user-24d6f8323faa@xymon.invalid] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 8:39 AM To: xymon at xymon.com Subject: Re: [xymon] Fresh server install on RHEL5: source or yum repo?
*snip*
▸
Sorry, guess I should have elaborated. I wanted to hear if you'd give the same advice now as a year ago, and whether we could count on a Xymon rpm repo being maintained going forward. Looks like the answers are "yes" and "maybe". Given that some of the rpm-based file locations differ from those resulting from a source install, I'm now leaning toward installing from source.
That's arguably a feature-not-a-bug of using a packaged system :) For me, putting things in FHS locations seems to make the best sense, with compatibility symlinks provided for things that are expecting HOBBITCLIENTHOME, BBHOME, and other variables to be useful.
Packages I've written go beyond the distributed ones to really push things around, but have made upgrading much more manageable that doing anything from source.
Your server you might be able to, but if you have the option of using packages on your clients I'd strongly suggest it; you'll be happier in the future.
Regards,
-jc