[Infrastructures] Re: Host installs?

[Daniel Pittman]

On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Stephen Schaefer wrote:
> Things may have improved, but my past experience is that, due to deep
> and undocumented dependencies, finding the right supporting packages
> to add to a minimal install takes days, not minutes. 

If that's your experience, I can certainly see how you would feel less
enthusiastic about it than I do -- my experience is generally the
reverse.

> True, once you've done it, you've presumably created a class with
> which to easily duplicate the environment, but it's a puzzle that some
> environments can afford to skip.

*nod*

> I may not be alone in this. From the "Bootstrapping an Infrastructure"
> paper, "Step 10: Client File Access":
> 
> "In keeping with the virtual machine concept, it is important that
> every process on every host see the exact same file namespace. This
> allows applications and users to always find their data and home
> directories in the same place, regardless of which host they're on."

I don't think that's quite talking about the same issue.

My reading of that is to ensure that you keep the data, not the
application install set, identical on every machine.

So, you don't have /home on each machine as a distinct item, you make
sure that everyone gets the same /home on every machine.

In the end, though, I guess it's a matter of taste. Trying to support
systems installed by companies where people did go for 'everything++'
has left me decidedly unimpressed by that path, so I tend to oppose it
more vehemently than it really deserves. :)

    Daniel

-- 
I am he, As you are he, As you are me, And we are all together.
        -- John Lennon, "I Am The Walrus"