Re: looking for suggestions for managing a tree of server configs

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:57 AM,  [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

david@lang.hm writes:

quoted

I've got a directory tree that holds config data for all my
servers. This consists of one directory per server (which is updated
periodically from what is currently configured on that server), plus
higher level summary reports and similar information.

today I have just a single git tree covering everything, and I make a
commit each time one of the per-server directories is updated, and
again when the top-level stuff is created.

It is quite clear to me what you are keeping at the top-level files,
but if a large portion of the configuration for these servers are
shared, it might not be a bad idea to have a canonical "gold-master"
configuration branch, to which the shared updates are applied, with
a branch per server that forks from that canonical branch to keep
the machine specific tweaks as differences from the canonical stuff,
instead of having N subdirectories (one per machine).

In an ideal world yes, but right now these machines are updated by many
different tools (unforuntantly including 'vi'), so these directories aren't
the config to be pushed out to the boxes (i.e. what they should be), it's
instead an archived 'what is', the result of changes from all the tools.

The systems are all built with a standard image, but the automation tools I
do have tend to push identical files out to many of the systems (or files
identical except for a couple of lines)

David,
Is there any particular reason you aren't using etckeeper?

-- 
-Drew Northup
--------------------------------------------------------------
"As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?"
-John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59