3 ms·
No. Well, yes, replace yum, apt, etc. But once you have a functional package management system, you don't need Puppet, Chef or Ansible, because the same statel
by cwp 13y ago
No.
Well, yes, replace yum, apt, etc. But once you have a functional package management system, you don't need Puppet, Chef or Ansible, because the same stateless configuration language can be used to describe cluster configurations as well as packages. So build a provisioning tool based on that, instead.
That provisioning tool is called NixOps. The article links to it, but doesn't really go into detail about NixOps as a replacement for Puppet et al.
- lmm 13y agoThat's just as true without Nix. I've worked somewhere that applied changes to its clusters by building debs; all you need is something that regularly executes apt-get and you're golden. (Of course, whether something's a good language for expressing particular kinds of tasks is another question)
- jes5199 13y agoam I going to switch distros just to use a different provisioning tool?
- sparkie 13y agoYes... Eventually. The Nix model is the only sane model going into the future where complexity will continue to increase. Nobody is forcing you to switch distros now, but hinting that you'll probably want to look into this, because the current models might well be on their way to obsolescence.
- westurner 13y ago* Unique PREFIX; cool. Where do I get signed labels and checksums? * I fail to see how baking configuration into packages can a) reduce complexity; b) obviate the need for configuration management. * How do you diff filesystem images when there are unique PREFIXes in the paths? A salt module would be fun to play around with. How likely am I to volunteer to troubleshoot your unique statically-linked packages?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]