From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-152469-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC26513827E
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:16:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D85BE09A5;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:16:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qc0-f170.google.com (mail-qc0-f170.google.com [209.85.216.170])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87384E095A
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:16:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id x13so975366qcv.1
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:16:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=3xly25Cb6SgPDBhO3vxKaGKPj/iMlicQTpbhA+dAvqo=;
        b=BdNlMENlW0fV+mufvYuKwBpVrdXcLumLEi+m8VPCP9BG5J9IrN6yYz6rh7tWofXoxx
         mjrYt6aZnLU+JJqGbmbLkcMR7KROMit/q0TPCdbo4j10doW2ZEZ8cryKXMBo+rjgN6FC
         qbNwcFTcfQUJTy9JIrU75LIDMGQZBRPvIYRQQiIcx0j1oeVFckiI/UY+ERKN82LBBvmM
         WJbjvxTYgOBr7gRtpFRaTO4KdPBBy4elZ75yW598IPiNtg2QcsMkCqsOlHphHUf7eDwz
         ldQJ45mMPoJJlrefMrQvXF39SRtCg9EXXQ0A/kzSSTN/XgtBVBWw0Pl+LzVcFUT8u461
         CfUA==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.49.82.130 with SMTP id i2mr18684379qey.68.1386893803837;
 Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:16:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.224.36.20 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:16:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAN0CFw36hP1TW8toZV-81f=8bRO7LTLyW-gbNddjUaQkJ8S=MA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN0CFw0w73Np4Xn83xCm1eFghQBmu2cWoTkekL33Uihzyxiy8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<524358B0.1060000@gmail.com>
	<CAN0CFw2gC__sR9Mg1Y8kue4qZxKUZTjccOVrcE0Tqd6XBjwQRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<52449C1A.5000306@gmail.com>
	<CAN0CFw1JTGPt7B5DEHsX=20jbEU9E0urL2VaveGon9jA0q1G-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<5245E03A.2020605@gmail.com>
	<CAN0CFw1O-emn6qg3fdC7iDLsfM5oTn9p_ny95HEyUO-qtFHDaQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<52489438.3090405@gmail.com>
	<CAN0CFw0hw6jNZL0S+PBLN3D9EJdz0dFmSW_Xq2Kgr_FwyEA=aQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5249D186.8050808@gmail.com>
	<CAN0CFw0r8-4KgH0SxJwqE4gpuAm-Knuk-Tjtm3yb8H6Y6BD7tg@mail.gmail.com>
	<524A699E.6080006@gmail.com>
	<CAN0CFw1OkaN2rdigQMDi65Hsvpc1HyS5oWpQa5VZaHFnGjwcgg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN0CFw36hP1TW8toZV-81f=8bRO7LTLyW-gbNddjUaQkJ8S=MA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:16:43 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOTuDKoMJ1Gd4NsVi3AsgRmOTpsTPxadGHdaFtTJ1s0Ee_Yf0g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Managing multiple systems with identical hardware
From: "Poison BL." <poisonbl@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: c4411bca-a305-4099-be0f-94b7ce40b1be
X-Archives-Hash: 65d2135518e0faf8b272df74477fa146

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm about to embark on this (perilous?) journey and I'm wondering if
> anyone would make a comment on any of the questions in the last
> paragraph below.  This is basically my plan for setting up a bunch of
> systems (laptops) in an office which are hardware-identical to my own
> laptop and creating a framework to manage them all with a bare minimum
> of time and effort.
>
> Thanks,
> Grant
>
>
>>>>>>> I see what you desire now - essentially you want to clone your laptop
>>>>>>> (or big chunks of it) over to your other workstations.
>>
>> I've been working on this and I think I have a good and simple plan.
>>
>> My laptop roams around with me and is the "master" system.  The office
>> router is the "submaster" system.  All of the other office systems are
>> "minion" systems.  All of the systems are 100% hardware-identical
>> laptops.  All of the minions are 100% software-identical.
>>
>> I install every package that any system needs on the master and create
>> an SSH keypair.  The only config files that change from their state on
>> the master are: /etc/conf.d/hostname, /etc/conf.d/net,
>> /etc/ssh/sshd_config, /etc/shorewall/*.  I write comments in those
>> files which serve as flags for scripted changes.
>>
>> I write a script that is run from the master to the submaster, or from
>> the submaster to a minion.  If it's the former, rsync / is run with
>> exceptions (/usr/portage, /usr/local/portage, /var/log, /tmp, /home,
>> /root but /root/.ssh/id_rsa_script* is included), my personal user is
>> removed, a series of workstation users are created with useradd -m,
>> services are added or removed from /etc/runlevels/default, and config
>> files are changed according to comment flags.  If it's the latter,
>> rsync / is run without exceptions, services are added or removed from
>> /etc/runlevels/default, and config files are changed according to
>> comment flags.
>>
>> All user info on the submaster and minions would be effectively reset
>> whenever the script is run and that's fine.  Root logins would have to
>> be allowed on the submaster and minions but only with the SSH key.
>> There are probably more paths to exclude when rsyncing master to
>> submaster.
>>
>> That's it.  No matter how numerous the minions become, this should
>> allow me to keep everything running by administrating only my own
>> system, pushing that to the submaster, and having the submaster push
>> to the minions.  I've been going over the nitty-gritty and everything
>> looks good.
>>
>> What do you think?  Is there anything inherently wrong with rsyncing /
>> onto a running system?  If there are little or no changes to make,
>> about how much data would actually be transferred?  Is there a better
>> tool for this than rsync?  I know Funtoo uses git for syncing with
>> their portage tree.
>>
>> - Grant
>

Only thing that comes immediately to mind in rsyncing an overwrite of
/ is that any process that's running that goes looking for libraries
or other data after the rsync pulls the rug out from beneath it might
behave erratically, crash, kick a puppy, write arbitrary data all over
your drive. Also, it's somewhat important to be careful about the
various not-really-there mounts, /dev, /sys, /proc... /run's probably
touchy too, and /var has a few pieces that might be in use mid-sync
and choke something along the way. My idea on that would be... build
an initramfs that:

1) boots to a script
  a) warns the user that it's hungry and that feeding it will be
dangerous to any non-backed-up data, with prompt
  b) warns the user again, with prompt ('cause watching an rsync roll
by that eats that document you just spent 3 weeks on isn't fun)
2) mounts / in a working directory
3) rsyncs the new data from the sub-master
4) kicks off a script to update a hardware keyed (mac address is good
for this) set of settings (hostname, etc)
5) reboots into the new system.

For extra credit... sync /home back to the sub-master to prevent
overfeeding the beast.

-- 
Poison [BLX]
Joshua M. Murphy