On Fri, 7 Oct 2011 06:34:00 -0700 (PDT)
jcbollinger jcbollinger wrote:
> On Oct 7, 8:11 am, Arnau Bria <arnaub...@pic.es> wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Oct 2011 05:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> > jcbollinger jcbollinger wrote:
> > > While I'm on this topic, I'll throw in that I would find it
> > > terribly confusing if a class or definition failed to honor my
> > > specification for a parameter named 'ensure'.
> >
> > Sorry John, but I don't understand this point.
>
> Because of the consistent manner of "ensure" parameters' use in
> Puppet's built-in resources, and the associated conventions even for
> custom and defined types, I would be very surprised if I ever declared
> something with "ensure => 'absent'" but that specification was
> overridden to the opposite. Indeed, I would be at least somewhat
> surprised by that with *any* parameter. Don't give me the option if
> you don't intend to honor it.
Ok, now it's clear.
I should put that logic outside the class, in node/param definitions ..
something like:
if ($::kernel=='Linux') and ($::lsbmajdistrelease=='6') {
class { 'common::nrpe' :
ensure => absnet,
}else{
class { 'common::nrpe' :
ensure => present,
}
> Inasmuch as this is for testing purposes, however, that's a different
> story. I don't think I would test in the way you are doing, but then
> again, maybe I would.
>
> John
>
Many thanks for your reply,
Arnau
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
