[Pulp-list] Exclude packages or package groups from repo sync

Tue Oct 22 15:46:39 UTC 2013

Thanks; I added some comments to the bug.

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Mike McCune <mmccune at redhat.com> wrote:

> I don't think any work has been done on it but more comments and
> justifications here:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/**show_bug.cgi?id=1004001<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1004001>
>
> will help prioritize and capture the requirements for the feature
>
>
> On 10/15/2013 09:22 AM, Christina Plummer wrote:
>
>> Any updates on this one?  I am also looking for a way to avoid syncing
>> the source RPMs from the Oracle Linux upstream repo, as Brian mentioned.
>>
>> As a workaround, I tried removing the SRPMs from my repo following the
>> sync using " pulp-admin rpm repo remove srpm --repo-id=ol5-x86_64 -a
>> 20130901", but that had no effect (even though " pulp-admin rpm repo
>> content srpm --repo-id=ol5-x86_64 -a 20130901 " showed me the packages).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Christina
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Brian Lee <brian_lee1 at jabil.com
>> <mailto:brian_lee1 at jabil.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     I appreciate the responses. Here are some use cases that I can
>> imagine.
>>
>>     - Users that don't require X Windows for any of their Linux systems
>>     would prefer not to sync anything that depends on X Windows. These
>>     could be excluded/blacklisted based on package names, simple pattern
>>     matching, regex, or yum package groups.
>>
>>     - Some repositories, such as OracleLinux
>>     <http://public-yum.oracle.com/**repo/OracleLinux/OL6/latest/**x86_64/<http://public-yum.oracle.com/repo/OracleLinux/OL6/latest/x86_64/>>
>>
>>
>>     include the *.src.rpm in the same repo directory, which makes
>>     syncing the entire repository *much* larger.
>>
>>     - Users that only want to sync a select few packages from a
>>     repository, and exclude the rest.
>>
>>     Thanks again,
>>     Brian
>>
>>
>>     On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Christina Plummer
>>      <cplummer at gmail.com <mailto:cplummer at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi,
>>
>>         I am interested in this as well.  I had read an interesting
>>         USENIX paper[1] and slidedeck[2] last year about using Pulp to
>>         manage yum repositories for enterprise environments, and had
>>         hoped to implement something similar.  However, it appears that
>>         the features they depend on were only available in Pulp v1.
>>
>>         The basic workflow is something like this:
>>         1) Sync all updates from upstream to "live" repo (probably daily)
>>         2) Sync all "non-impactful" updates from "live" (filter out
>>         kernel and any other pkgs that we identify as needing more
>>         testing) to "unstable" repo (probably weekly - so pkgs are 1
>>         week old before they appear)
>>         3) Sync all "non-impactful" updates from "unstable" after they
>>         have been there for a certain time period (weekly or monthly) to
>>         "stable" repo
>>         4) Don't point any servers to the "live" repo
>>         5) Point non-production servers to "unstable" repo
>>         6) Point production servers to "stable" repo
>>         7) Manually promote "impactful" packages to "unstable" for testing
>>         8) Manually promote "impactful" packages to "stable" after
>>         having been tested
>>
>>         As best I can tell, the solution described in the paper is based
>>         on "Sync filters", which don't seem to be available in Pulp v2.
>>           So I think the only way to implement something like this would
>>         be to use the "copy" feature, which I don't believe can be
>>         scheduled.
>>
>>         Is it possible to implement this sort of workflow in Pulp v2?
>>
>>         Christina
>>
>>         [1]
>>         https://www.usenix.org/legacy/**events/lisa11/tech/full_**
>> papers/Pierre.pdf<https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/lisa11/tech/full_papers/Pierre.pdf>
>>         [2]
>>         https://www.usenix.org/legacy/**events/lisa11/tech/slides/**
>> pierre.pdf<https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/lisa11/tech/slides/pierre.pdf>
>>
>>
>>         On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Randy Barlow
>>         <rbarlow at redhat.com <mailto:rbarlow at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             On Tue 06 Aug 2013 10:04:48 AM EDT, Brian Lee wrote:
>>             > I believe in older versions of Pulp you could exclude
>> certain packages
>>             > from being synced locally. However, I haven't encountered
>> the method
>>             > for this in Pulp 2.1. To conserve disk space, it would be
>> nice if we
>>             > could exclude packages that match a regex pattern or belong
>> to a
>>             > package group. Let me know if I've just missed this option
>> in the
>>             > documentation or if it's not currently supported.
>>
>>             Hi Brian,
>>
>>             We don't currently support this feature, but we have talked
>>             about it
>>             before and we are interested in the possibility of
>>             supporting something
>>             like this. It would be interesting to use to know your use
>>             case, as
>>             there is some difficulty in coming up with a nice way to
>>             express what
>>             should be included or excluded from the CLI. You mention
>> package
>>             groups, which makes me also think of package categories.
>>             Thanks for the
>>             suggestion!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Pulp-list mailing list
>> Pulp-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/**mailman/listinfo/pulp-list<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20131022/ce2145b9/attachment.htm>