----- Phil Gardner <phil gardnerjr gmail com
> I am actually just now setting up a similar environment. From what I can
> tell, Pulp is better at managing repos with keeping track of package
> versions, and can push updates out to the consumers without actually
> interacting with the server (consumer).
> I have been testing with adding a second non-ssl vhost to Pulp's apache
> and using that url as the install/updates repos when kickstarting
> (inside cobbler kickstart templates). Or you could just import the base
> install trees into cobbler and just use that for installs. Each would work.
> Any other important differences between the two? Some of their
> functionality does overlap, but pulp is better at dealing with lots of
> repos, and cobbler is great for managing kickstart stuff.
> On 10/26/2011 11:40 AM, Dan White wrote:
> > I have a Cobbler/Puppet/Kickstart environment I am running with, but I am running into problems maintaining a local set of repo mirrors.
> > Is it possible to roll Pulp into this mix ?
> > “Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.”
> > Bill Waterson (Calvin & Hobbes)
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pulp-list mailing list
> > Pulp-list redhat com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
> Phil Gardner
> PGP Key ID 0xFECC890C
> OTR Fingerprint 6707E9B8 BD6062D3 5010FE8B 36D614E3 D2F80538
> Pulp-list mailing list
> Pulp-list redhat com
Pulp-list mailing list
Pulp-list redhat com