[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#53486: [PATCH] deploy: Add '--execute'.
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
bug#53486: [PATCH] deploy: Add '--execute'. |
Date: |
Wed, 02 Feb 2022 18:44:17 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:
>>
>>> This sure is useful, but for the very first time I feel that this
>>> doesn’t quite belong. There are a bunch of tools out there that focus
>>> exclusively on remote execution on several machines at once.
>>>
>>> One of them is pdsh, which lets you also define groups of machines by
>>> type and submit to a selected subset. It also displays remote output
>>> locally, and it sends local input to the remote as well.
>>>
>>> It’s tempting to add this to “guix deploy” because it likely that
>>> parallel remote execution is desired when “guix deploy” is used, but it
>>> also feels … kinda wrong.
>>
>> True, but here that allows you to talk to the machines actually listed
>> in ‘deploy.scm’. Were you to use an external tool, you’d have to
>> somehow grep/sed the thing to get a list of host names.
>
> That’s a good point.
Actually the impetus for me was when I found myself repeatedly writing
half-baked Bash ‘for’ loops on berlin and then learned that Mathieu had
promoted the ‘for’ loop to a shell script in his home directory. I
thought we could do better. :-)
That said, I agree that it’s no substitute for real tools in this area
like pdsh; it’s really just a helper for basic situations.
> As a stepping stone towards something more … “ordered” I guess my
> objections to the feature melt away :) Don’t let me be in the way!
Alright, pushed as 5c13484646069064c834bbd3cd02c3bc80d94cb6!
Thanks,
Ludo’.