Stefan Cheers for the feedback.
Understood on the exists element. Yes, what I'm trying to achieve is a working provider without asadmin being in the path. That's what I've worked towards by using a full path to the relevant asadmin file, as it's possible a given node could have one or more versions of glassfish installed. Currently, the asadmin path gets calculated using several parameter values, which allows a user calling the class to override any given parameter. The actual command execution appears to work as expected currently, though will take another look at the execute command. Cheers Gavin On Oct 24, 2012 6:15 PM, "Stefan Schulte" <stefan.schu...@taunusstein.net> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 03:38:20AM -0700, Gavin Williams wrote: > > Ok, I've gone about it a slightly different way now, and have stripped > the > > 'commands' argument from the domain function provider, and am trying to > > validate the presence of asadmin at the main asadmin.rb level. > > > > I've created an 'exists?' definition, but it doesn't appear to be getting > > called. Any ideas how I can force it to be called prior to attempting to > > execute asadmin? > > > > Latest code commit has been pushed to github, available here: > > > https://github.com/fatmcgav/puppet-glassfish/commit/429f9e8e1d08e99c69d8ffdcb3043648af5fa18a > > > > Any comments welcome. > > > > Regards > > Gavin > > Your exists? method in puppet/provider/domain/el.rb overwrites the > exists? method in puppet/provider/asadmin.rb. I don't know if you get > problems when you have an el.rb file but you define an asadmin provider > here. This may create classname clashes with the asadmin provider defined > in > provider/asadmin.rb > > The exists? method in asadmin.rb is not going to work because `commands` > is a class method while `exists` is an instance method. It does make no > sense to call `commands` inside an instance method. > > What exactly are you trying to archive anyhow? If the excutable is not in > PATH how should your provider work? The best approach in my opinion > is to always specify the full path to the executable. If you want your > provider considered suitable even if commands are missing, you can use > > optional_commands :asadmin => 'binary_that_may_be_absent' > > If you want the user to supply the path to the binary via a resource > parameter then you cannot realize this at a class level but at an > instance level. That beeing said, you cannot define your executables > with use the `commands` method. > > To execute something you can use the execute method. You then have to > do something like. > > output = execute([resource[:asadmin_binary], "arg1", "arg2"]) > > -Stefan > > > > > On Wednesday, 26 September 2012 17:01:47 UTC+1, Gavin Williams wrote: > > > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > I'm trying to setup Glassfish config management using puppet. > > > I've found larstobi's module here > > > <https://github.com/larstobi/puppet-glassfish/>which I've cloned and > am > > > starting to tweak, as it would appear that the mentioned module is > based on > > > Solaris, therefore I'm starting to add support for EL. My code tree is > > > here <https://github.com/fatmcgav/puppet-glassfish>. > > > > > > The challenge I'm hitting currently is that upon executing, it's > failing > > > with > > > > > >> *err: Could not find a suitable provider for domain* > > >> > > > > > > When running at debug level, I can see the following: > > > > > >> *debug: Puppet::Type::Domain::ProviderAsadmin: file asadmin does not > > >> exist > > >> debug: Class[Glassfish::Domain]: The container Stage[main] will > propagate > > >> my refresh event > > >> err: Could not find a suitable provider for domain > > >> * > > > > > > > > > I've verified that the asadmin file exists, as follows: > > > > > >> *notice: /Stage[main]/Glassfish::Domain/Notify[gfdomain]/message: > > >> defined 'message' as 'Creating Glassfish domain cms using portbase > 9000. > > >> Asadmin file is: /usr/local/glassfish-3.1.2/bin/asadmin.'* > > >> > > > > > > *# file /usr/local/glassfish-3.1.2/bin/asadmin > > >> /usr/local/glassfish-3.1.2/bin/asadmin: POSIX shell script text > executable > > >> * > > >> > > > > > > So the file definitely exists, and is a valid 'asadmin' file. > > > > > > Any ideas? > > > > > > Cheers > > > Gavin > > > > > > > -- > > 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/-/_pJvxmzaEmUJ. > > 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. > > -- 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.
