RE: Locking for temporary ad-hoc changes?

[Mark Burgess]

I have scaned but I'm not sure that I understand this discussion. Can
you spell out the conclusions for me?

M

On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 14:21 -0800, Wil Cooley wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 13:59 -0800, David Masterson wrote:
> 
> > The former -- but it won't work if you're doing checksum based copying.  I
> > suppose you could simplify this by having update.conf define a class if a
> > file exists and then only do copying if the class is not present.
> 
> Yes, and I use checksum almost exclusively.  I could, of course, use
> 'IfFileExists(foo.lock)' to define a class (or whatever the function
> name is; I forget) and then only update if that class is not defined.
> The problem is that I'd need to do such a thing for EVERY file, which
> would not only be tedious to implement, it wouldn't be possible for
> recursive directory copies.  Now that I think about it, however, it
> might be doable to implement a host-wide lock with minimal changes to my
> existing configuration.
> 
> > The idea is to temporarily tell cfagent to not do an update from the
> > master while you're making local modifications.
> 
> Right.  And my opinion, and what I am asking Mark to consider, is that a
> simple tool and a few changes in the existing code to check for and
> report the locks would be better than increasing the complexity of
> current configurations.
> 
> > As to the latter, that entails running cfservd locally and have the master
> > copy changed files back.  It could then alert you to the changes and allow
> > you to check them into your repository.
> 
> Yeah, I know it can be done like that, but my wish is for something
> bigger.
> 
> Wil
> _______________________________________________
> Help-cfengine mailing list
> Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine