Any chance you copied over a bare metal box image, or something? In any case, facter would seem to have only a handful of checks to determine "virtual" or non-virtual... unfortunately I don't have a vmware box in front of me to verify this, but you should be able to find facter's "virtual" tests in some place like:
/usr/lib/ruby/1.[89]/facter/util/virtual.rb (slightly more convoluted if you're running puppet under rvm) At first glance, for VMWare, it appears to be looking for /proc/self/status and/or /proc/virtual. On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Forrie <for...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure I understand his setup, or what he means by "minimal > install". > > My environment on the VMware image is CentOS 5.7, it is a full release > and the NFS mount contains a full release of Puppet and Ruby 1.8.x. > > Perhaps there's something that Facter gets wrong when it's being > called from a non-system location? > > Another possibility, is the previous run of Puppet was local -- each > machine still has a local /var/lib/puppet layout with all the > information that was stored (I'm not doing storedconfigs, yet). > Could information in there play into this somehow. > > > Thanks. > > -- > 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. > > -- 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.
