Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm interested in Puppet configuration management system, but wonder where the fine line goes between kick-start and Puppet?

Today I do a lot of tasks in kick-start (powered by Cobbler), including some custom partitioning.

Question is, if better to move everything (except custom partitioning and puppet packages) into Puppet, for a more flexible management? Or there are some defined guidelines for this?

Thanks.

share|improve this question
1  
I just answered this question here: serverfault.com/questions/98872/scripted-install-vs-cloning/… –  Justin Jan 2 '10 at 23:55
    
So it's as I said - do the partition + install Puppet, then do all the rest from the Puppet scripts? Just a quick question - can Puppet manage installed repos? Thanks. –  SyRenity Jan 3 '10 at 0:00
1  
Puppet can do anything you can do manually. Sometimes the trick is teaching puppet how to do something idempotently. ie, you can't just tell it to add a repo, you also need to give it a way to check to see if the repo is already added. puppet makes this pretty easy though. –  Justin Jan 3 '10 at 0:19

1 Answer 1

up vote 16 down vote accepted

You need a baseline system with puppet on it to allow puppet to start managing the system. So you should use kickstart to do the base install (with the puppet packages) then use puppet to configure the rest of the system. They are complimentary not competitive technologies.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.