[Puppet Users] Re: strange string in /etc/shadow
On Jun 15, 8:24 pm, Gus F. gus.fer...@gmail.com wrote:
It is happening on 0.25.5-1 server, but so far I have only seen the
problem on 0.24.X clients. I don't have an 0.25.4 master to test
against, but at any rate I am unable to reproduce the problem. The
problem seems to have occurred in a relatively small time across the
affected clients, and hasn't happened again (yet).
Sounds like the same setup here. We're in the middle of transitioning,
masters are .25.5 and clients .24.8. Wasn't able to reproduce, and a
very low occurrence rate. I only see one failure in the past ~6 hours.
Maybe a dozen for the entire day. And that's at ~1400 puppetruns/hr.
Nigel,
Doesnt look like an issue with Concat define. This is a straight File
resource here:
file {
/etc/mail:
owner = root, mode = 0755, group = root, ensure =
directory;
}
Wed Jun 16 00:00:42 -0700 2010 //#YAML::Syck::BadAlias:0x2a9881c690/
File[/etc/mail] (err): Failed to retrieve current state of resource:
can't convert YAML::Syck::BadAlias into Integer
Wed Jun 16 00:00:42 -0700 2010 //#YAML::Syck::BadAlias:0x2a9881c690/
Remotefile[/etc/mail/sendmail.cf]/File[/etc/mail/sendmail.cf]
(notice): Dependency file[/etc/mail] has 1 failures
Wed Jun 16 00:00:42 -0700 2010 //#YAML::Syck::BadAlias:0x2a9881c690/
Remotefile[/etc/mail/sendmail.cf]/File[/etc/mail/sendmail.cf]
(warning): Skipping because of failed dependencies
Wed Jun 16 00:00:42 -0700 2010 //#YAML::Syck::BadAlias:0x2a9881c690/
Remotefile[/etc/mail/aliases]/File[/etc/mail/aliases] (notice):
Dependency file[/etc/mail] has 1 failures
Wed Jun 16 00:00:42 -0700 2010 //#YAML::Syck::BadAlias:0x2a9881c690/
Remotefile[/etc/mail/aliases]/File[/etc/mail/aliases] (warning):
Skipping because of failed dependencies
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] total control for certain resources
Hi all, For some definition-based and custom resources, I'm looking for a way to tell systems: only these should be present, the rest should be purged. 2 examples I can come up with are databases and webserver vhosts. Say I have configured a node to have 3 databases (a, b and c). Now I decide I don't want c anymore. I end up putting ensure = absent for c. After a run, I can remove c alltogether. This feels like a odd thing to do. Ofcourse leaving c in (with absent) does no harm, but it will clutter the configs after some time. I would like to somehow configure some resource-types to remove/purge everything that does not get mentioned in the config. Then I can just take stuff out of configs if I don't want it anymore. Has anyone found a solution for this? Thanks, Mathijs -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] total control for certain resources
Mathijs bluescreen...@gmail.com writes:
For some definition-based and custom resources, I'm looking for a way
to tell systems: only these should be present, the rest should be
purged.
Please don't run this, but:
# The puppet version of rm -rf /*
Package { ensure = absent, noop = true }
User { ensure = absent, noop = true }
# These override the defaults
package { foo: ensure = present }
Daniel
--
✣ Daniel Pittman✉ dan...@rimspace.net☎ +61 401 155 707
♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] total control for certain resources
- Daniel Pittman dan...@rimspace.net wrote:
Mathijs bluescreen...@gmail.com writes:
For some definition-based and custom resources, I'm looking for a
way
to tell systems: only these should be present, the rest should be
purged.
Please don't run this, but:
# The puppet version of rm -rf /*
Package { ensure = absent, noop = true }
User { ensure = absent, noop = true }
# These override the defaults
package { foo: ensure = present }
How does this meet his goals? He want to just remove things from the manifest
and they must go away from the machines.
Some providers supports purging and you can purge unmanaged resources using the
resource type, but you really want to be careful with that.
In other cases you can use the trick that's in the FAQ of copying out an empty
dir over a dir full of managed files, it will then purge unmanaged files in
that dir. But there isn't really a blanket answer to this request today.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] Re: Provider gem is not functional on this platform
maybe a $PATH issue? is the gem command in a standard location? Yes, that was it. Thanks for pointing out the obvious to me :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] libvirt modules
Does anyone have any modules they could share to work with libvirt/kvm/qemu? I saw there was a GSOC going on related to this; is there public progress somewhere that I could help with (submit bugs, testing, etc)? -Doug signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Puppet Users] libvirt modules
Hello Doug! I'm building this module. You can see it's progress at [0]. You can also help submitting features and bugs at GSoC project in puppet's redmine [1] [0] github.com/carlasouza/puppet-virt [1] http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/gsoc Thanks for your interest :) -- Carla On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Doug Warner d...@warner.fm wrote: Does anyone have any modules they could share to work with libvirt/kvm/qemu? I saw there was a GSOC going on related to this; is there public progress somewhere that I could help with (submit bugs, testing, etc)? -Doug -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Installing several packages in order
Hello Alan,
I've got a file resource that makes sure a specific directory tree is
created..
$dirs = [/var, /var/lanl, /var/lanl/puppet]
@file { $dirs :
ensure = directory,
owner = root,
group = wheel,
mode = 755,
links = follow,
}
I would think that setting up a $packages array in the right order and
doing something like:
package{ $packages :
ensure = present,
}
would work... I'm currently on 0.25.1, and hoping that it'll still work
that way when I upgrade.
Regards,
-Roy
On 6/15/10 10:00 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:
I have some software with a list of patches that need to be installed in
order. Different hosts want different patches (e.g. development hosts
get patches that are not yet ready for production).
Obviously I can do this:
package { basepackage:
ensure = present,
}
package { patch1:
ensure = present,
require = Package[basepackage],
package { patch2:
ensure = present,
require = Package[patch1],
}
package { patch3:
ensure = present,
require = Package[patch2],
}
but I'd like to do something like this:
$package_list = [basepackage, patch1, patch2, patch3]
# The above value would actually come from extlookup()
install_packages_in_order { title:
package_list = $package_list
}
define install_packages_in_order($package_list) {
...insert code here...
}
or with alternating package names and version numbers:
$package_list = [basepackage, 1.2.3,
patch1, 1.2.3.0.1,
patch2, 1.2.3.0.2,
patch3, 1.2.3.0.3]
I think I can make this work using some ugly code inside
inline_template, or maybe writing my own parser functions,
but does anybody have any easier suggestions?
--apb (Alan Barrett)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] module organisation
Hello folks!
Since you cannot include modules twice, or overwrite anything
within a namespace, I'm looking for a way to organize my modules.
I initially started to create the following structure, which
will avoid storing redundant configuration in your manifests:
node server01.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server02.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server03.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server04.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::mailserver }
class servergroups::ono::server
{
include puppet::client
include ssh::server
include exim::minimal
}
class servergroups::ono::webserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include apache
...
}
class servergroups::ono::mailserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include exim::mx
...
}
But after having worked with this for a while now and putting more and
more configuration into Puppet, I hit the point where all servers would
want a certain service configuration (eg. a minimal exim configuration),
*except* for one, the mail server, which wants to include a much more
complex exim configuration.
So I'd like to know how others worked around such limitations,
whether there are any functions in Puppet I could use to work around
this issue,
or which other approaches I could take to reach the same goal - not
having to create a second servergroups::ono::server class for just
one server.
--
Stefan Schlesinger // ///
s...@ono.at+43.676.4911123
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Problem with dashboard using live report aggregation
I am seeing similar issues. In my puppet.conf I set reports = store, puppet_dashboard and libpath = /var/puppet/lib:$RAILS_ROOT/lib/puppet (RAILS_ROOT being /opt/puppet-dashboard where I installed puppet dashboard) Using a combined path like this does not seem to work for libpath. It views the entire string as one path. Is this by design? I then set libpath to just $RAILS_ROOT/lib/puppet With these settings I still get the message that it can't find the report named 'puppet_dashboard'. I even tried linking the .rb files for the puppet_dashboard report to /var/puppet/lib and use the default libpath but that did not seem to help either. Any idea? On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:35 AM, christian christ...@cust.in wrote: Hey, I'm exploring puppet-dashboard right now and I want to get the live aggregation running. But somehow I'm already failing at the puppet.conf entries ;) The Dashboard readme says: ### Live report aggregation To enable report aggregation in Puppet Dashboard, the file `lib/puppet/ puppet_dashboard.rb` must be available in Puppet's lib path. The easiest way to do this is to add `RAILS_ROOT/lib/puppet` to `$libdir` in your `puppet.conf`, where `RAILS_ROOT` is the directory containing this README. Then ensure that your puppetmasterd runs with the option `--reports puppet_dashboard`. So how do I add that line? If I try something like $libdir = $vardir/lib;/usr/local/puppet- dashboard/lib/puppet or : or , or blank instead of ; I always get this error message from the clients: Could not prepare for execution: Got 1 failure(s) while initializing: change from absent to directory failed: Cannot create /var/lib/puppet/ lib,/usr/local/puppet-dashboard/lib/puppet; parent directory /var/lib/ puppet/lib,/usr/local/puppet-dashboard/lib does not exist I'm using Pupet 0.25.4 on Open Suse 11.1 and Dashboard 1.0.0 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.compuppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] module organisation
Hello,
You might consider having an ono environment, and webserver and
mailserver modules...
Regards,
-Roy
On 6/16/10 9:56 AM, Stefan Schlesinger wrote:
Hello folks!
Since you cannot include modules twice, or overwrite anything
within a namespace, I'm looking for a way to organize my modules.
I initially started to create the following structure, which
will avoid storing redundant configuration in your manifests:
node server01.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server02.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server03.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server04.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::mailserver }
class servergroups::ono::server
{
include puppet::client
include ssh::server
include exim::minimal
}
class servergroups::ono::webserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include apache
...
}
class servergroups::ono::mailserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include exim::mx
...
}
But after having worked with this for a while now and putting more and
more configuration into Puppet, I hit the point where all servers would
want a certain service configuration (eg. a minimal exim configuration),
*except* for one, the mail server, which wants to include a much more
complex exim configuration.
So I'd like to know how others worked around such limitations,
whether there are any functions in Puppet I could use to work around
this issue,
or which other approaches I could take to reach the same goal - not
having to create a second servergroups::ono::server class for just
one server.
--
Stefan Schlesinger // ///
s...@ono.at+43.676.4911123
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] module organisation
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Stefan Schlesinger s...@ono.at wrote:
Hello folks!
Since you cannot include modules twice, or overwrite anything
within a namespace, I'm looking for a way to organize my modules.
I initially started to create the following structure, which
will avoid storing redundant configuration in your manifests:
node server01.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server02.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server03.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server04.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::mailserver }
class servergroups::ono::server
{
include puppet::client
include ssh::server
include exim::minimal
}
class servergroups::ono::webserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include apache
...
}
class servergroups::ono::mailserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include exim::mx
...
}
But after having worked with this for a while now and putting more and
more configuration into Puppet, I hit the point where all servers would
want a certain service configuration (eg. a minimal exim configuration),
*except* for one, the mail server, which wants to include a much more
complex exim configuration.
It looks to me like you should do something like:
class exim::complex inherits exim::simple { ... }
overriding ::simple resources appropriately and defining any required
new resources, and then include exim::complex for that node, and
exim::simple for every node?
So I'd like to know how others worked around such limitations,
whether there are any functions in Puppet I could use to work around
this issue,
or which other approaches I could take to reach the same goal - not
having to create a second servergroups::ono::server class for just
one server.
--
Stefan Schlesinger // ///
s...@ono.at +43.676.4911123
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
--
nigel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] module organisation
Hello,
I like Nigel's response better -
Regards,
-Roy
On 6/16/10 10:02 AM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Stefan Schlesingers...@ono.at wrote:
Hello folks!
Since you cannot include modules twice, or overwrite anything
within a namespace, I'm looking for a way to organize my modules.
I initially started to create the following structure, which
will avoid storing redundant configuration in your manifests:
node server01.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server02.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server03.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::webserver }
node server04.ono.at { include servergroups::ono::mailserver }
class servergroups::ono::server
{
include puppet::client
include ssh::server
include exim::minimal
}
class servergroups::ono::webserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include apache
...
}
class servergroups::ono::mailserver inherits servergroups::ono::server
{
include exim::mx
...
}
But after having worked with this for a while now and putting more and
more configuration into Puppet, I hit the point where all servers would
want a certain service configuration (eg. a minimal exim configuration),
*except* for one, the mail server, which wants to include a much more
complex exim configuration.
It looks to me like you should do something like:
class exim::complex inherits exim::simple { ... }
overriding ::simple resources appropriately and defining any required
new resources, and then include exim::complex for that node, and
exim::simple for every node?
So I'd like to know how others worked around such limitations,
whether there are any functions in Puppet I could use to work around
this issue,
or which other approaches I could take to reach the same goal - not
having to create a second servergroups::ono::server class for just
one server.
--
Stefan Schlesinger // ///
s...@ono.at+43.676.4911123
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] libvirt modules
Hi Carla, I'm guessing we'll want to take this over to the -devel list as it gets developed. What I'd really like to see here, is one unified type (called virt), and one provider (called libvirt). While Puppet does have a system for multiple providers, libvirt is an abstraction layer, so this works best if libvirt is a provider, and we have one type called virt. Later, if virtualization types were not supported by libvirt, we could have additional providers. Does this make sense? --Michael On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Carla Araujo carla.aso...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Doug! I'm building this module. You can see it's progress at [0]. You can also help submitting features and bugs at GSoC project in puppet's redmine [1] [0] github.com/carlasouza/puppet-virt [1] http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/gsoc Thanks for your interest :) -- Carla On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Doug Warner d...@warner.fm wrote: Does anyone have any modules they could share to work with libvirt/kvm/qemu? I saw there was a GSOC going on related to this; is there public progress somewhere that I could help with (submit bugs, testing, etc)? -Doug -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] Puppet package uninstall question
This may be a really simple question. I have defined a package to ensure=latest in one of my modules. In the nodes.pp, I have the module included, and the package installs fine. Now I want to remove the module/package from my server. Can't I just remove the include of the module from the nodes.pp and it should automatically uninstall the package? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Puppet package uninstall question
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Roshan rosh...@gmail.com wrote: This may be a really simple question. I have defined a package to ensure=latest in one of my modules. In the nodes.pp, I have the module included, and the package installs fine. Now I want to remove the module/package from my server. Can't I just remove the include of the module from the nodes.pp and it should automatically uninstall the package? (Un)Fortunately, No; you have to explicitly remove it with an ensure = absent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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. -- Tony -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Installing several packages in order
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Roy Nielsen wrote:
I've got a file resource that makes sure a specific directory tree
is created..
$dirs = [/var, /var/lanl, /var/lanl/puppet]
@file { $dirs :
ensure = directory,
owner = root,
group = wheel,
mode = 755,
links = follow,
}
Puppet automatically makes each file depend on its parent directory, so
your exmple should work.
I would think that setting up a $packages array in the right order
and doing something like:
package{ $packages :
ensure = present,
}
No, that won't install the packages in any specific order. There are no
explicit or implicit dependencies between apckages in your example, but
in my case I want each package to explicitly depend on its predecessor
in the array.
--apb (Alan Barrett)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] Re: Separate install for just client code?
I guess I'm just a little surprised that install.rb doesn't have an option to modify the installation, like ./install.rb --client ... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
I am trying to add an entry to /etc/aliases using this but am unable to
keep the entry from being added on every puppet run. I couldn't figure
out the proper onlyif attribute to use to add it only once.
augeas{ add sendmail alias :
context = /files/etc/aliases,
changes = [
set /files/etc/aliases/01/name mycron,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[1] us...@mydomain.com,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[2] us...@pmydomain.com,
],
}
exec { /usr/bin/newaliases: subscribe = Augeas[add sendmail
alias], refreshonly = true }
Thanks for the help.
Regards,
Sukh
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Separate install for just client code?
Forrie wrote: I guess I'm just a little surprised that install.rb doesn't have an option to modify the installation, like ./install.rb --client ... The major difference between the client and server packages on most OSes is the binaries they install - they still install all of the Puppet library. As such it's relatively easy to purge the binaries you don't need - generally on the client those in sbin aren't required and those in bin are and vice verse on the server. It'd be relatively easy to add such a capability to the install.rb script. If you want that feature please log a ticket. Regards James Turnbull -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Dashboard or Foreman
Is there any difference in core-functionality? On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 23:44, Eric Shamow eric.sha...@gmail.com wrote: Having tried both I settled on Foreman, although I haven't checked out Puppet-Dashboard after the 1.0 release. Foreman just provides more information, I find, although Puppet-Dashboard looks slightly slicker. Foreman also seems easily hackable/extensible and comes with a nice query tool. -Eric On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Walter Heck walterh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Guys, I'm reading about dashboard and foreman, and I'm wondering if there is anyone who made a comparison of the two? Can anyone help me decide which one to use? It feels like foreman is 'ahead' for now? cheers, Walter Heck Engineer @ OlinData (http://olindata.com) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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-us...@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-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Installing several packages in order
On 2010-06-16 19:21, Alan Barrett wrote:
No, that won't install the packages in any specific order. There are no
explicit or implicit dependencies between apckages in your example, but
in my case I want each package to explicitly depend on its predecessor
in the array.
How about this:
define pkglist_helper()
{
$pkg = inline_template('%= name.split(;)[0] -%')
$next = inline_template('%= name.split(;)[1] or -%')
if $next != {
package {
$pkg:
ensure = installed,
before = Package[$next];
}
} else {
package {
$pkg:
ensure = installed;
}
}
}
define packagelist($packages)
{
$foo = inline_template(
'% lst = []; 0.upto(packages.length - 1) { |i|
lst packages[i] + ; + (packages[i+1] or );
} -%%=
lst.join(|) -%')
$bar = split($foo, [|])
pkglist_helper {
$bar: ;
}
}
Use it like this:
packagelist {
some-packages--title-does-not-matter:
packages = [ foo, bar, gazonk, del, xyzzy ];
}
I have only tested it very briefly (using notify instead of
package), but it seemed to work.
/Bellman
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] Composed custom facts, request for opinions and ideas (somewhat related to setting up puppet)
This is somewhat related to an older thread. The topic was how to
install some perquisite packages for puppet, like augeas, lsb-release,
cron to name just a few. Puppet is required to reinstall this packages
if they are accidentally uninstalled. Because of the nature of this
packages some puppet code should not run in this state.
/For example/ if lsb-release isn't installed, and clients are both
ubuntu and debian, the apt package shouldn't setup sources as it might
end up switching the distro. (if lsb-release isn't installed facter can
not distinguish debian from ubuntu)
Augeas resources if are included in the run end up failing the run, thus
not allowing augeas to be installed.
My conclusion from the list was that facts should be used, so I started
thinking on something extensible.
The scope is to create a set of facts and a centralizing fact. The
centralizing fact is called, in my case, systemissane. Now how can I
centralize these facts?
What I have tried (attached files) is to create a separte collection
class, which is the bridge between facts. But the require in
sane_debian_lsb is kind of hackish, not to mention that it limits these
facts to a single module. So are there any better ideeas? Opinions? Is
this code absolutely awful? Should I try using a common naming between
the facts instead of this collection class?
Silviu
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
# sane.rb
# sumarization fact, indicates if the system configuration is sane
#
Facter.add(systemissane) do
setcode do
val = true
Facter::Util::SaneFacts.collection.each do |factName|
val = val Facter[factName].value
end
val
end
end
# sane_debian_lsb.rb
#
# indicates if operatingsystem may be wrong (in case of debian based systems)
#
dir = File.dirname(__FILE__)
require #{dir}/sane_facts.rb
Facter.add(systemislsbsane) do
confine :operatingsystem = %w(Debian Ubuntu)
setcode do
count = %x[dpkg -l | grep -c lsb-release]
count.to_i 0
end
end
Facter.add(systemislsbsane) do
setcode do
true
end
end
Facter::Util::SaneFacts.add(systemislsbsane)
# sane_facts.rb
#
# Class that gathers all the sane facts.
# Or in plain English all the facts the indicate the sanity of the environment
module Facter::Util::SaneFacts
@@collection=[]
def self.collection
@@collection
end
def self.add(sanityFactName)
@@collection=(@@collection sanityFactName).uniq
end
end
Re: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
Search in the list history for a thread named augeas type and
/etc/services
Silviu
On 16.06.2010 20:38, Sukh Khehra wrote:
I am trying to add an entry to /etc/aliases using this but am unable to
keep the entry from being added on every puppet run. I couldn't figure
out the proper onlyif attribute to use to add it only once.
augeas{ add sendmail alias :
context = /files/etc/aliases,
changes = [
set /files/etc/aliases/01/name mycron,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[1] us...@mydomain.com,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[2] us...@pmydomain.com,
],
}
exec { /usr/bin/newaliases: subscribe = Augeas[add sendmail
alias], refreshonly = true }
Thanks for the help.
Regards,
Sukh
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Installing several packages in order
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Thomas Bellman wrote: in my case I want each package to explicitly depend on its predecessor in the array. How about this: Thank you! I would eventually have written something involving two defines calling eack other, with inline_template to munge the arguments, but I would probably not have found such a simple solution, and I had not yet started writing the code. --apb (Alan Barrett) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Problem with dashboard using live report aggregation
I'm already running with pluginsync=true, so I just stuck puppet_dashboard.rb into one of my modules: find . -name puppet_dashboard.rb -print ./modules/puppet/lib/puppet/reports/puppet_dashboard.rb And pluginsync does its magic. I don't touch libpath or anything like that. I'm not 100% clear if I need the dashboard script on the nodes (I don't think so...), puppetmasters, or what, but this worked for me when I was fighting through the same problem so I said why question it; then the deployment of the file is in puppet so if I build a new puppetmaster it gets pushed out like it should, automagically. I do puppet my masters though. If you didn't, this trick probably won't work for you. You can always puppet them with --noop -- you'll still do pluginsync in non--noop mode and only actually apply --noop to the puppet configuration itself. On 06/16/2010 07:02 AM, Jon Choate wrote: I am seeing similar issues. In my puppet.conf I set reports = store, puppet_dashboard and libpath = /var/puppet/lib:$RAILS_ROOT/lib/puppet (RAILS_ROOT being /opt/puppet-dashboard where I installed puppet dashboard) Using a combined path like this does not seem to work for libpath. It views the entire string as one path. Is this by design? I then set libpath to just $RAILS_ROOT/lib/puppet With these settings I still get the message that it can't find the report named 'puppet_dashboard'. I even tried linking the .rb files for the puppet_dashboard report to /var/puppet/lib and use the default libpath but that did not seem to help either. Any idea? On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:35 AM, christian christ...@cust.in mailto:christ...@cust.in wrote: Hey, I'm exploring puppet-dashboard right now and I want to get the live aggregation running. But somehow I'm already failing at the puppet.conf entries ;) The Dashboard readme says: ### Live report aggregation To enable report aggregation in Puppet Dashboard, the file `lib/puppet/ puppet_dashboard.rb` must be available in Puppet's lib path. The easiest way to do this is to add `RAILS_ROOT/lib/puppet` to `$libdir` in your `puppet.conf`, where `RAILS_ROOT` is the directory containing this README. Then ensure that your puppetmasterd runs with the option `--reports puppet_dashboard`. So how do I add that line? If I try something like $libdir = $vardir/lib;/usr/local/puppet- dashboard/lib/puppet or : or , or blank instead of ; I always get this error message from the clients: Could not prepare for execution: Got 1 failure(s) while initializing: change from absent to directory failed: Cannot create /var/lib/puppet/ lib,/usr/local/puppet-dashboard/lib/puppet; parent directory /var/lib/ puppet/lib,/usr/local/puppet-dashboard/lib does not exist I'm using Pupet 0.25.4 on Open Suse 11.1 and Dashboard 1.0.0 -- 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 mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com mailto:puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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-us...@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-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
On 16.06.2010 20:38, Sukh Khehra wrote:
I am trying to add an entry to /etc/aliases using this but am unable to
keep the entry from being added on every puppet run. I couldn't figure
Is there something wrong with the puppet native type to manage this file?
out the proper onlyif attribute to use to add it only once.
augeas{ add sendmail alias :
context = /files/etc/aliases,
changes = [
set /files/etc/aliases/01/name mycron,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[1] us...@mydomain.com,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[2] us...@pmydomain.com,
],
}
exec { /usr/bin/newaliases: subscribe = Augeas[add sendmail
alias], refreshonly = true }
Thanks for the help.
Regards,
Sukh
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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-us...@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.
RE: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
Yes, I read that thread and thought I was ensuring path uniqueness by
inserting the string 01 in there but its not working for me. I
examined the tree using augtool and as expected did not see a subtree
numbered at 01 so thought I should be be able to do this. Any other
suggestions?
-Original Message-
From: Silviu Paragina [mailto:sil...@paragina.ro]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 11:31 AM
To: puppet-users@googlegroups.com
Cc: Sukh Khehra
Subject: Re: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
Search in the list history for a thread named augeas type and
/etc/services
Silviu
On 16.06.2010 20:38, Sukh Khehra wrote:
I am trying to add an entry to /etc/aliases using this but am unable
to
keep the entry from being added on every puppet run. I couldn't figure
out the proper onlyif attribute to use to add it only once.
augeas{ add sendmail alias :
context = /files/etc/aliases,
changes = [
set /files/etc/aliases/01/name mycron,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[1] us...@mydomain.com,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[2] us...@pmydomain.com,
],
}
exec { /usr/bin/newaliases: subscribe = Augeas[add sendmail
alias], refreshonly = true }
Thanks for the help.
Regards,
Sukh
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] Re: Separate install for just client code?
I can't find the ticket link. FWIW: These are the files installed for the server component: ./etc/puppet ./etc/puppet/fileserver.conf ./etc/puppet/manifests ./etc/puppet/puppetca.conf ./etc/puppet/puppetd.conf ./etc/puppet/puppetmasterd.conf ./etc/rc.d/init.d/puppetmaster ./etc/sysconfig/puppetmaster ./usr/bin/puppetrun ./usr/sbin/puppetca ./usr/sbin/puppetmasterd There are many more as a part of the client side, including *.rb code. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] purging unnecessary data from directory
Hello All,
I have a syntax question: Instead of the yumrepo function, I'd
rather distribute a custom repo file via puppet. i.g,
file { /etc/yum.repos.d/base.repo:
ensure = present,
purge = true,
force = true,
owner = root,
group = root,
mode = 0644,
source = $architecture ? {
i386 = puppet:///basic/base-x86.repo,
x86_64 = puppet:///basic/base-x64.repo}
}
As you can see, I used the purge function, thinking that it'd delete
other files within that directory, but it doesn't work. How can I
ensure that the file I copy over is the only file that's going to be
in that folder?
Cheers,
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] purging unnecessary data from directory
- CraftyTech hmmed...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,
I have a syntax question: Instead of the yumrepo function, I'd
rather distribute a custom repo file via puppet. i.g,
file { /etc/yum.repos.d/base.repo:
ensure = present,
purge = true,
force = true,
owner = root,
group = root,
mode = 0644,
source = $architecture ? {
i386 = puppet:///basic/base-x86.repo,
x86_64 = puppet:///basic/base-x64.repo}
}
As you can see, I used the purge function, thinking that it'd delete
other files within that directory, but it doesn't work. How can I
ensure that the file I copy over is the only file that's going to be
in that folder?
The FAQ covers this, and the answer is different depending on your version of
puppet
--
R.I.Pienaar
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] Re: purging unnecessary data from directory
Got it, thanks.
On Jun 16, 3:34 pm, R.I.Pienaar r...@devco.net wrote:
- CraftyTech hmmed...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,
I have a syntax question: Instead of the yumrepo function, I'd
rather distribute a custom repo file via puppet. i.g,
file { /etc/yum.repos.d/base.repo:
ensure = present,
purge = true,
force = true,
owner = root,
group = root,
mode = 0644,
source = $architecture ? {
i386 = puppet:///basic/base-x86.repo,
x86_64 = puppet:///basic/base-x64.repo}
}
As you can see, I used the purge function, thinking that it'd delete
other files within that directory, but it doesn't work. How can I
ensure that the file I copy over is the only file that's going to be
in that folder?
The FAQ covers this, and the answer is different depending on your version of
puppet
--
R.I.Pienaar
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
I understood why that solution isn't working. Not sure if I could put
together a similar solution.
The onlyif would probably look like
match /files/etc/aliases/*[name='mycron' and count(value) = 2]/name
size == 1
or
match /files/etc/aliases/*[name='mycron']/value == [list of e-mail address]
But Pienaar is right you should use the mailalias type if you can.
Silviu
On 16.06.2010 22:02, Sukh Khehra wrote:
Yes, I read that thread and thought I was ensuring path uniqueness by
inserting the string 01 in there but its not working for me. I
examined the tree using augtool and as expected did not see a subtree
numbered at 01 so thought I should be be able to do this. Any other
suggestions?
-Original Message-
From: Silviu Paragina [mailto:sil...@paragina.ro]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 11:31 AM
To: puppet-users@googlegroups.com
Cc: Sukh Khehra
Subject: Re: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
Search in the list history for a thread named augeas type and
/etc/services
Silviu
On 16.06.2010 20:38, Sukh Khehra wrote:
I am trying to add an entry to /etc/aliases using this but am unable
to
keep the entry from being added on every puppet run. I couldn't figure
out the proper onlyif attribute to use to add it only once.
augeas{ add sendmail alias :
context = /files/etc/aliases,
changes = [
set /files/etc/aliases/01/name mycron,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[1] us...@mydomain.com,
set /files/etc/aliases/01/value[2] us...@pmydomain.com,
],
}
exec { /usr/bin/newaliases: subscribe = Augeas[add sendmail
alias], refreshonly = true }
Thanks for the help.
Regards,
Sukh
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet
Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Separate install for just client code?
Forrie wrote: I can't find the ticket link. http://projects.puppetlabs.com/ FWIW: These are the files installed for the server component: ./etc/puppet ./etc/puppet/fileserver.conf ./etc/puppet/manifests ./etc/puppet/puppetca.conf ./etc/puppet/puppetd.conf ./etc/puppet/puppetmasterd.conf ./etc/rc.d/init.d/puppetmaster ./etc/sysconfig/puppetmaster ./usr/bin/puppetrun ./usr/sbin/puppetca ./usr/sbin/puppetmasterd There are many more as a part of the client side, including *.rb code. All the .rb files are installed for both server and client. Regards James Turnblul -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Dashboard or Foreman
IMHO it depend's... if you are just looking for a dashboard.. honestly.. I don't know which one is better... however, If you are looking for more functionallity... than you should take a look on foreman. I am using foreman... The dashboard is nice and I can use foreman as a external node tool :) Cheers, Gus On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Walter Heck - OlinData.com walterh...@olindata.com wrote: Is there any difference in core-functionality? On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 23:44, Eric Shamow eric.sha...@gmail.com wrote: Having tried both I settled on Foreman, although I haven't checked out Puppet-Dashboard after the 1.0 release. Foreman just provides more information, I find, although Puppet-Dashboard looks slightly slicker. Foreman also seems easily hackable/extensible and comes with a nice query tool. -Eric On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Walter Heck walterh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Guys, I'm reading about dashboard and foreman, and I'm wondering if there is anyone who made a comparison of the two? Can anyone help me decide which one to use? It feels like foreman is 'ahead' for now? cheers, Walter Heck Engineer @ OlinData (http://olindata.com) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.compuppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.compuppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.compuppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
On Jun 16, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Sukh Khehra wrote: Yes, I read that thread and thought I was ensuring path uniqueness by inserting the string 01 in there but its not working for me. I examined the tree using augtool and as expected did not see a subtree numbered at 01 so thought I should be be able to do this. Any other suggestions? If that’s the thread I’m thinking of, I was pretty heavily involved and I think you may have missed the point. You want a unique path that identifies the entry you’re trying to manipulate. * It needs to be unique so it won’t clobber an existing entry. * It needs to identify the target entry so Puppet will see that it exists on all but the initial run. By using 01 in the path somewhere, you’re only doing the first part, but since the 01 entry will never show up when Puppet looks at the file, it will assume it needs to add the entry (again and again). A unique path that identifies an entry in `/etc/aliases` would look something like this: /files/etc/aliases/*[name = 'ftp’] So with that, you can do things like: set /files/etc/aliases/*[name = ‘ftp’]/name ftp I’ve said before that Puppet encourages us to design things so they won’t hurt anything when run over and over, but the Augeas type seems to behave the opposite way by default in these “numbered item” contexts. Having said that, things have really improved with updates to both Augeas and Puppet and I think it’s an extremely valuable combo. It just takes some time to get comfortable with how it works. -- Rob McBroom http://www.skurfer.com/ It's not that I think guns, drugs, prostitution, swimming, eating and reading should be legal. It's just that no one on Earth has the authority to make them illegal. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] Dashboard or Foreman
Anyone look at making a full configuration management tool? Dan Sent via Droid On Jun 16, 2010 4:44 PM, Gustavo Soares gustavosoa...@gmail.com wrote: IMHO it depend's... if you are just looking for a dashboard.. honestly.. I don't know which one is better... however, If you are looking for more functionallity... than you should take a look on foreman. I am using foreman... The dashboard is nice and I can use foreman as a external node tool :) Cheers, Gus On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Walter Heck - OlinData.com walterh...@olindata.com wrote: I... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To p... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
[Puppet Users] Re: Separate install for just client code?
What is the disadvantage of using the puppet gem vs. installing from source (install.rb)? On Jun 15, 5:33 pm, Todd Zullinger t...@pobox.com wrote: [ .. ] I'd highly recommend not using gems. :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] augeas and sendmail aliases
On 16.06.2010 23:45, Rob McBroom wrote: On Jun 16, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Sukh Khehra wrote: Yes, I read that thread and thought I was ensuring path uniqueness by inserting the string 01 in there but its not working for me. I examined the tree using augtool and as expected did not see a subtree numbered at 01 so thought I should be be able to do this. Any other suggestions? set /files/etc/aliases/*[name = ‘ftp’]/name ftp I've actually tried this in augtool and puppet and it didn't work. In puppet it fails silently and on first sight you would believe everything went ok. In augtool it simply fails. If this works for you could you please post your version and/or other tricks. Silviu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] libvirt modules
It makes totally sense -- Carla On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Michael DeHaan mich...@puppetlabs.comwrote: Hi Carla, I'm guessing we'll want to take this over to the -devel list as it gets developed. What I'd really like to see here, is one unified type (called virt), and one provider (called libvirt). While Puppet does have a system for multiple providers, libvirt is an abstraction layer, so this works best if libvirt is a provider, and we have one type called virt. Later, if virtualization types were not supported by libvirt, we could have additional providers. Does this make sense? --Michael On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Carla Araujo carla.aso...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Doug! I'm building this module. You can see it's progress at [0]. You can also help submitting features and bugs at GSoC project in puppet's redmine [1] [0] github.com/carlasouza/puppet-virt [1] http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/gsoc Thanks for your interest :) -- Carla On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Doug Warner d...@warner.fm wrote: Does anyone have any modules they could share to work with libvirt/kvm/qemu? I saw there was a GSOC going on related to this; is there public progress somewhere that I could help with (submit bugs, testing, etc)? -Doug -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Puppet Users group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.compuppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.compuppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] total control for certain resources
R.I.Pienaar r...@devco.net writes:
- Daniel Pittman dan...@rimspace.net wrote:
Mathijs bluescreen...@gmail.com writes:
For some definition-based and custom resources, I'm looking for a way to
tell systems: only these should be present, the rest should be purged.
Please don't run this, but:
# The puppet version of rm -rf /*
Package { ensure = absent, noop = true }
User { ensure = absent, noop = true }
# These override the defaults
package { foo: ensure = present }
How does this meet his goals? He want to just remove things from the manifest
and they must go away from the machines.
Well, setting a default of 'ensure = absent' tells the providers that when
something isn't listed in the manifest it should go away — which was my
reading of the request.
I suppose that Mathijs could be looking to have only things that were managed
by puppet go away when removed...
Some providers supports purging and you can purge unmanaged resources using
the resource type, but you really want to be careful with that.
Well, yes. You seem to be saying more or less the same thing I am, but
disagreeing with me, and I don't quite understand where.
Daniel
--
✣ Daniel Pittman✉ dan...@rimspace.net☎ +61 401 155 707
♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
Re: [Puppet Users] total control for certain resources
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Daniel Pittman dan...@rimspace.netwrote:
R.I.Pienaar r...@devco.net writes:
- Daniel Pittman dan...@rimspace.net wrote:
Mathijs bluescreen...@gmail.com writes:
Well, setting a default of 'ensure = absent' tells the providers that when
something isn't listed in the manifest it should go away — which was my
reading of the request.
that only works for defined packages! e.g. if you do
package{xyz:}
then it will remove it by default, it will not remove the other packages.
Some providers supports purging and you can purge unmanaged resources
using
the resource type, but you really want to be careful with that.
Well, yes. You seem to be saying more or less the same thing I am, but
disagreeing with me, and I don't quite understand where.
The resource purge removes things which are not defined in puppet, e.g.
remove all hosts from /etc/hosts unless they are defined in puppet.
Ohad
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
