Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Updated Polyverse reinstall commands in Dockerfile #5173

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 14, 2019
Merged

Updated Polyverse reinstall commands in Dockerfile #5173

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 14, 2019

Conversation

archisgore
Copy link
Contributor

The problem:

After this PR was merged (#5137),
we noticed on our end that the default Polyverse install script
had room for improvement to ensure there's reliability.

To be more specific, we noticed that while we only expose x86_64 packages,
we noticed a pull to an x86 (32-bit package) that was not expected.

What this meant was, during our first update, we were completely removing
existing mirrors/packages in the install script.

The fix:

Our install script now merely comments out the existing repos/mirrors.

The install instructions then merely update/upgrade all packages in-place,
this preferring our packages as a priority, and the final command
uncomments all the other mirrors/repos that may exist.

The outcome:

Due to this step, ALL existing repos stay on the host after Polymorphic
repositories are sbuscribed. Everything works as expected. However,
the host will prefer Polymorphic repositories above others.

Summary
Component Name
Additional Information

The problem:

After this PR was merged (#5137),
we noticed on our end that the default Polyverse install script
had room for improvement to ensure there's reliability.

To be more specific, we noticed that while we only expose x86_64 packages,
we noticed a pull to an x86 (32-bit package) that was not expected.

What this meant was, during our first update, we were completely removing
existing mirrors/packages in the install script.

The fix:

Our install script now merely comments out the existing repos/mirrors.

The install instructions then merely update/upgrade all packages in-place,
this preferring our packages as a priority, and the final command
uncomments all the other mirrors/repos that may exist.

The outcome:

Due to this step, ALL existing repos stay on the host after Polymorphic
repositories are sbuscribed. Everything works as expected. However,
the host will prefer Polymorphic repositories above others.
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Jan 14, 2019

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@paulfantom paulfantom merged commit 0b33dd6 into netdata:master Jan 14, 2019
@netdatabot netdatabot added the area/packaging Packaging and operating systems support label Jan 14, 2019
kiku-jw pushed a commit to kiku-jw/netdata that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2019
The problem:

After this PR was merged (netdata#5137),
we noticed on our end that the default Polyverse install script
had room for improvement to ensure there's reliability.

To be more specific, we noticed that while we only expose x86_64 packages,
we noticed a pull to an x86 (32-bit package) that was not expected.

What this meant was, during our first update, we were completely removing
existing mirrors/packages in the install script.

The fix:

Our install script now merely comments out the existing repos/mirrors.

The install instructions then merely update/upgrade all packages in-place,
this preferring our packages as a priority, and the final command
uncomments all the other mirrors/repos that may exist.

The outcome:

Due to this step, ALL existing repos stay on the host after Polymorphic
repositories are sbuscribed. Everything works as expected. However,
the host will prefer Polymorphic repositories above others.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/packaging Packaging and operating systems support
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants