On Friday, April 27, 2012 8:28:32 AM UTC-7, Luke Bigum wrote: > > What problem are you trying to solve that you think you need Puppet? The > recommended Puppet way would be to package your binaries and use Puppet > to enforce new versions of the package. You said your Admins are used to > just getting on the rdist master, make changes and then practically an > rsync? If that's the way you work and the way you want to continue to > work then I don't think Puppet's going to beat rdist for this use case. > > I was afraid of that. Well, even if we continue doing rdisted binary distribs, the additional "run if changed" hooks, I think might be better served by puppet. yes? The current triggers are a bit quirky. And, we do many configs by symlinks on individual machines, to the "standard" configs in the rdisted common tree. I'd rather have that stuff handled by puppet configs. There are "only" about 15 triggers, and 10-ish symlinks per machine. For symlinks, I mean stuff like
/etc/resolv.conf -> /shared/path/resolv/resolv.conf-machinetype I'd rather puppet do actual COPIES of files. That works better with solaris patches. So I'm thinking some kind of puppet class, that autocopies /shared/path/resolv/resolv.conf-machinetype to /etc/resolv.conf whenever the /shared/path version gets changed by rdist. Is that going to work reliably? Triggers do things like, "if config file target has changed, restart demon". So, perfect puppetness there. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/s3m4tvQXRpMJ. 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.
