Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Cannot dry run puppet on the puppetmaster
Am 08.05.2011 05:12, schrieb treydock: Here's the output using debug option. [...] debug: catalog supports formats: b64_zlib_yaml dot marshal pson raw yaml; using pson err: Could not retrieve catalog from remote server: execution expired warning: Not using cache on failed catalog err: Could not retrieve catalog; skipping run There's not much to see here. It would probably more informative to start the server with the --debug flag and see what is going on there. Regards Christian -- Dipl.-Inf. Christian Kauhaus · k...@gocept.com · systems administration gocept gmbh co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 11 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development -- 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.
[Puppet Users] extending puppet without hacking puppet
Is it possible to extend 'package' without actually hacking the puppet
code. I'd like to do this:
package { httpd:
name= httpd,
ensure = present,
check = newer,
}
My goal is this. For every package I have in puppet, I'd like to check
to see if I have a newer version in the repository than I have on the
server. If that's the case I'd like to record that. (Probably in a log
file). This will allow me to produce a report of packages that need
upgraded. I can't just ensure = latest because it violates our
change procedure.
--
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.
Re: [Puppet Users] extending puppet without hacking puppet
On 09-05-11 14:29, Jeff wrote:
Is it possible to extend 'package' without actually hacking the puppet
code. I'd like to do this:
package { httpd:
name= httpd,
ensure = present,
check = newer,
}
My goal is this. For every package I have in puppet, I'd like to check
to see if I have a newer version in the repository than I have on the
server. If that's the case I'd like to record that. (Probably in a log
file). This will allow me to produce a report of packages that need
upgraded. I can't just ensure = latest because it violates our
change procedure.
You could define a type, that wraps Package and uses an Exec to do
whatever you want.
Best regards,
Martijn.
--
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.
Re: [Puppet Users] extending puppet without hacking puppet
On 09-May-2011, at 6:33 PM, Martijn Grendelman wrote:
On 09-05-11 14:29, Jeff wrote:
Is it possible to extend 'package' without actually hacking the puppet
code. I'd like to do this:
package { httpd:
name= httpd,
ensure = present,
check = newer,
}
My goal is this. For every package I have in puppet, I'd like to check
to see if I have a newer version in the repository than I have on the
server. If that's the case I'd like to record that. (Probably in a log
file). This will allow me to produce a report of packages that need
upgraded. I can't just ensure = latest because it violates our
change procedure.
You could define a type, that wraps Package and uses an Exec to do
whatever you want.
I guess if you ever want to do this kinda stuff , Either implement this core
logic in package provider or separate out this kinda controlled change
management out of config management . For my case i had a requirement of
installing a package from a particular yum repo , so i wrapped up “Yum install
stuff” in a definition and some hacky stuff .
--
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.
Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server
From: Ohad Levy ohadl...@gmail.com To: puppet-users@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, 15 April, 2011 19:42:10 Subject: Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, is there a way how to instruct the master to forward the obtained reports to another master server so we can have one central report server that would be receiving all reports from other masters in individual collocations? the report_server works fine for the master itself but not for the forwarded reports. If you use a tool such as foreman or dashboard, you can simply forward the reports to it. AM: not that simply - how about security? the puppet 8140 traffic is encrypted and mutually authenticated between the agent and master the puppet dashboard - how will you achieve the mutual X509 based authentication between the master and remote dashboard? additionally, afair, you could simply define the report server on the clients and forward to any master. AM: not if the clients can talk only to the master and not to the remote dashboard I am looking for something similar to the central inventory server as it works greatly for facts but for reports as well. that is built into foreman since almost two years now. Ohad anyone? thanks, Antony -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: -- *From:* Ohad Levy ohadl...@gmail.com *To:* puppet-users@googlegroups.com *Sent:* Fri, 15 April, 2011 19:42:10 *Subject:* Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, is there a way how to instruct the master to forward the obtained reports to another master server so we can have one central report server that would be receiving all reports from other masters in individual collocations? the report_server works fine for the master itself but not for the forwarded reports. If you use a tool such as foreman or dashboard, you can simply forward the reports to it. AM: not that simply - how about security? the puppet 8140 traffic is encrypted and mutually authenticated between the agent and master the puppet dashboard - how will you achieve the mutual X509 based authentication between the master and remote dashboard? simply ensure that https is turned on and ssl verify mode is enforced? or if you dont have common ca between all of your masters, just turn on ssl, and filter down the allowed hosts to send reports (i.e only your puppet masters can communicate with foreman/dashboard. additionally, afair, you could simply define the report server on the clients and forward to any master. AM: not if the clients can talk only to the master and not to the remote dashboard I am looking for something similar to the central inventory server as it works greatly for facts but for reports as well. that is built into foreman since almost two years now. Ohad anyone? thanks, Antony -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server
On May 9, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Ohad Levy wrote: On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Ohad Levy ohadl...@gmail.com To: puppet-users@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, 15 April, 2011 19:42:10 Subject: Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, is there a way how to instruct the master to forward the obtained reports to another master server so we can have one central report server that would be receiving all reports from other masters in individual collocations? the report_server works fine for the master itself but not for the forwarded reports. If you use a tool such as foreman or dashboard, you can simply forward the reports to it. AM: not that simply - how about security? the puppet 8140 traffic is encrypted and mutually authenticated between the agent and master the puppet dashboard - how will you achieve the mutual X509 based authentication between the master and remote dashboard? simply ensure that https is turned on and ssl verify mode is enforced? or if you dont have common ca between all of your masters, just turn on ssl, and filter down the allowed hosts to send reports (i.e only your puppet masters can communicate with foreman/dashboard. Last I checked, puppet can't send reports to an https server. Only to a http server. Has this changed? -- 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.
Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Patrick kc7...@gmail.com wrote: On May 9, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Ohad Levy wrote: On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: -- *From:* Ohad Levy ohadl...@gmail.com *To:* puppet-users@googlegroups.com *Sent:* Fri, 15 April, 2011 19:42:10 *Subject:* Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.comwrote: Hi, is there a way how to instruct the master to forward the obtained reports to another master server so we can have one central report server that would be receiving all reports from other masters in individual collocations? the report_server works fine for the master itself but not for the forwarded reports. If you use a tool such as foreman or dashboard, you can simply forward the reports to it. AM: not that simply - how about security? the puppet 8140 traffic is encrypted and mutually authenticated between the agent and master the puppet dashboard - how will you achieve the mutual X509 based authentication between the master and remote dashboard? simply ensure that https is turned on and ssl verify mode is enforced? or if you dont have common ca between all of your masters, just turn on ssl, and filter down the allowed hosts to send reports (i.e only your puppet masters can communicate with foreman/dashboard. Last I checked, puppet can't send reports to an https server. Only to a http server. Has this changed? not if you use something like: https://github.com/ohadlevy/puppet-foreman/blob/master/foreman/files/foreman-report.rb 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-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.
[Puppet Users] Re: Data Sources CSV files vs Database
Thanks Ohad and Nan. Your responses were helpful On May 5, 12:37 am, Ohad Levy ohadl...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Nan Liu n...@puppetlabs.com wrote: On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:51 PM, rjl rjlin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Presently, I am managing my external data via CSV files. These files are manually changed as required. Are you using extlookup function to retrieve the CSV configuration data? I would like to have a UI that updates a database (probably postgres) and then have puppet retrieve its external data directly from the database. You will need to write either a custom function that performs data lookup. Something along the line of: # connect to postgres # sql query using lookup criteria (typically certname) # return data hash Or you can write a custom external node classifier (ENC): http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/external_nodes.html or you can use one for the common one (foreman, dashbord) foreman does support postgres as well... 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-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.
[Puppet Users] Re: using return value of a shell command as a puppet conditional
On Feb 5, 1:56 am, Nigel Kersten ni...@puppetlabs.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Nick Moffitt n...@zork.net wrote: Nigel Kersten: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Daniel Pittman dan...@puppetlabs.com wrote: (Also, I went looking and found zero attempts to solve this in a reusable, FOSS way, let alone working solutions.) Yep. I've been dreaming of a Puppet-integrated Password Safe for a while :) Alas! I'm currently enjoying a powerful need for such a thing. My one need is that someone who compromises a puppet client host shouldn't have access to the safe except in specific circumstances specified by external conditions. I'd also like a pony. Have it on my desk by Monday. I actually did some work on this on the plane recently, re-using the certificates that nodes already have to do arbitrary encryption and decryption. It's not as seamless as I'd like, I've essentially subclassed the file type, but it's giving me some ideas about how we might want to come up with something more integrated. I'll polish it up and put it up on github next week when I get back from FOSDEM. Hi Nigel, I found this via a google search today. I've come up with a few possible solutions, but I don't like them. I was thinking of using the existing cert as well. Have you posted the code you came up with? Kyle -- 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.
[Puppet Users] Re: using return value of a shell command as a puppet conditional
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM, kcrwfrd kcrw...@gmail.com wrote: On Feb 5, 1:56 am, Nigel Kersten ni...@puppetlabs.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Nick Moffitt n...@zork.net wrote: Nigel Kersten: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Daniel Pittman dan...@puppetlabs.com wrote: (Also, I went looking and found zero attempts to solve this in a reusable, FOSS way, let alone working solutions.) Yep. I've been dreaming of a Puppet-integrated Password Safe for a while :) Alas! I'm currently enjoying a powerful need for such a thing. My one need is that someone who compromises a puppet client host shouldn't have access to the safe except in specific circumstances specified by external conditions. I'd also like a pony. Have it on my desk by Monday. I actually did some work on this on the plane recently, re-using the certificates that nodes already have to do arbitrary encryption and decryption. It's not as seamless as I'd like, I've essentially subclassed the file type, but it's giving me some ideas about how we might want to come up with something more integrated. I'll polish it up and put it up on github next week when I get back from FOSDEM. Hi Nigel, I found this via a google search today. I've come up with a few possible solutions, but I don't like them. I was thinking of using the existing cert as well. Have you posted the code you came up with? No, I'll spend some time tonight finding it. It ended up on another laptop and bad Nigel didn't commit it to version control anywhere external, so it's not as obvious as it should be... It's also very ghetto, so don't expect any polish. There were some limitations with the size of the text you could encrypt, so I had to chunk. I think RI ran into the same issue a while ago. Ideally we'd do this in a much more transparent manner. If you care a lot about this, please put in a feature request with as much detail as you can provide. The more the community registers interest in features, the more likely it is that someone steps up and gets it done :) -- Nigel Kersten Product, Puppet Labs @nigelkersten -- 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.
[Puppet Users] Could not retrieve metadata - 2.6.7 / RHEL4 / remote site
Hi, I've got a 2.6.7 server and client setup running pretty nicely in a single site on a few rhel5 and 6 boxes, and today branched out with a RHEL4 node on a remote site. This was installing 2.6.7 (and facter 1.5.8) from source due to the lack of el4 rpms (el5's from yum.puppetlabs.com on all other RHEL boxes so far), with oldish official ruby 1.8.1 el4 rpms. On this new node I'm getting about a 30-40% failure rate in terms of runs, with errors in retrieving metadata: Mon May 09 22:16:12 +0100 2011 /Stage[main]/Nss-ldap/File[/etc/nsswitch.conf] (err): Could not evaluate: Could not retrieve file metadata for puppet:///modules/nss-ldap/nsswitch.conf: at /etc/puppet/modules/nss-ldap/manifests/init.pp:37 This happens on various different modules, but always the same error, trying to get a file for a source reference. I'm aware there are a few new variables I've thrown in, but the WAN connectivity seems to be fine, no packet loss or anything, and also as these errors are reported on the server and client, it's not like it's actually losing connection with the puppet server. Does this intermittent error ring any bells? With tagmail reports telling us about this, it's not really ignorable for us. Thanks Chris -- 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.
[Puppet Users] Re: Passenger Error during the evaluation of config/environment.rb
Hi Den,
I tried downgrading Puppet as well as Passenger to 2.2.15 but I still
get the Passenger error page. It seems to me that something else is
going on. Below is the stacktrace that appears in the error page. Is
it normal that Puppet is trying to daemonize the process when
running in Apache?
The application is failing at
# Put the daemon into the background.
def daemonize
if pid = fork
Process.detach(pid)
exit(0)
end
0 /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/daemon.rb19 in `exit'
1 /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/daemon.rb19 in `daemonize'
2 /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/application/master.rb105
in
`main'
3 /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/application/master.rb46
in
`run_command'
4 /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/application.rb 287 in `run'
5 /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/application.rb 393 in
`exit_on_fail'
6 /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/application.rb 287 in `run'
7 config.ru 21
8 /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.2.2/lib/rack/builder.rb 46
in
`instance_eval'
9 /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.2.2/lib/rack/builder.rb 46
in
`initialize'
10 config.ru 1 in `new'
11 config.ru 1
On May 4, 7:59 pm, Denmat tu2bg...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I haven't tested puppet/passengerwith those versions ofpassenger/rake but
they appear high to me.
I use 2.1x ofpassengerand 1.1 of rake (cant remember exact versions). Higher
versions did not work.
This may or may not be your particular issue as I currently run 2.6.4 of
puppet.
Cheers,
Den
On 05/05/2011, at 7:51,PBWebGuypbweb...@gmail.com wrote:
I have been through all of the instructions for setting up a
PuppetMaster usingPassenger. At the present time, when I access
PassengerI receive thePassengerError page with the message The
application has exited during startup (i.e. during the evaluation of
config/environment.rb). I've looked at the log files and there is
nothing obvious.
When I run puppetmaster everything is working with a 2nd node. Then
when I switch over toPassenger, I get the error.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
John
Here is some of my configuration information:
config.ru
# a config.ru, for use with every rack-compatible webserver.
# SSL needs to be handled outside this, though.
# if puppet is not in your RUBYLIB:
# $:.unshift('/opt/puppet/lib')
$0 = master
# if you want debugging:
# ARGV --debug
ARGV --debug
#ARGV --rack
require 'puppet/application/master'
# we're usually running inside a Rack::Builder.new {} block,
# therefore we need to call run *here*.
run Puppet::Application[:master].run
---
*** LOCAL GEMS ***
daemon_controller (0.2.6)
fastthread (1.0.7)
passenger(3.0.7)
rack (1.2.2)
rake (0.8.7)
Running Puppet 2.6.7
--
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
athttp://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.
[Puppet Users] Managing Switches.
All, I was looking at the new feature of puppet to manage switches, and it says: A current limitation is that it isn’t possible to have 2 switches with the same interface name Does this mean that if one switch has an interface called FastEthernet 0/1, that puppet can't manage a second switch with an interface called FastEthernet 0/1? If so, that probably means you can manage a sum total of... 1 switch, given that interface names are pretty common... I hope I'm reading this wrong... 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-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.
Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server
On May 9, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Ohad Levy wrote: On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Patrick kc7...@gmail.com wrote: On May 9, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Ohad Levy wrote: On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Ohad Levy ohadl...@gmail.com To: puppet-users@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, 15 April, 2011 19:42:10 Subject: Re: [Puppet Users] multimaster architecture with central report server On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Antony Mayi antonym...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, is there a way how to instruct the master to forward the obtained reports to another master server so we can have one central report server that would be receiving all reports from other masters in individual collocations? the report_server works fine for the master itself but not for the forwarded reports. If you use a tool such as foreman or dashboard, you can simply forward the reports to it. AM: not that simply - how about security? the puppet 8140 traffic is encrypted and mutually authenticated between the agent and master the puppet dashboard - how will you achieve the mutual X509 based authentication between the master and remote dashboard? simply ensure that https is turned on and ssl verify mode is enforced? or if you dont have common ca between all of your masters, just turn on ssl, and filter down the allowed hosts to send reports (i.e only your puppet masters can communicate with foreman/dashboard. Last I checked, puppet can't send reports to an https server. Only to a http server. Has this changed? not if you use something like: https://github.com/ohadlevy/puppet-foreman/blob/master/foreman/files/foreman-report.rb That's better than what I've seen, still, it looks like he client isn't verifying the server's certificate, and the client's not sending one either, meaning many of the benefits of SSL are gone. Do you know of a way (with code or a link to the right API) that would help with either of those? -- 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.
[Puppet Users] ANNOUNCE: Facter 1.5.9rc6
Facter 1.5.9rc6 is a maintenance release containing fixes and updates. The keen-eyed observers amongst you will notice it's been a month since our last RC5 of Facter 1.5.9, which is most certainly not our normal process. We simply missed the release after 7 days of no new bugs step, and have since set up a reminder system to make sure that poor Facter, the Cinderella of the Puppet family, doesn't get left cleaning the sooty hearth over and over again while her ugly sisters head off to Amsterdam for the Puppet Ball (EU) in search of a handsome prince. This release is available for download at: http://puppetlabs.com/downloads/facter/facter-1.5.9rc6.tar.gz See the Verifying Puppet Download section at: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/puppet/wiki/Downloading_Puppet#Verifying+Puppet+Downloads Please report feedback via the Puppet Labs Redmine site, using an affected version of 1.5.9rc6: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/facter/ CHANGELOG 1.5.9rc6 cc67a01 Removed inappropriately uncredited Ohai method from ec2 fact 69f98da Add facter test for ticket 7039 f91c120 downcase arp output so that the ec2 arp is matched a75f0f9 (#7039) Pre-load all facts when requesting a single fact -- Nigel Kersten Product, Puppet Labs @nigelkersten -- 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.
[Puppet Users] Re: [Puppet-dev] ANNOUNCE: Facter 1.5.9rc6
Nigel Kersten wrote: Facter 1.5.9rc6 is a maintenance release containing fixes and updates. For those using Fedora or RHEL/CentOS, I've updated the yum repos at: http://tmz.fedorapeople.org/repo/puppet/ Packages for EL 4 - 6 and Fedora 13 - 15 are available for testing. Add the puppet.repo file from either the epel or fedora directories to /etc/yum.repos.d to enable. If you find problems with the packaging, please let me know. If you find other bugs, please file them in redmine: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/puppet/issues -- ToddOpenPGP - KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~ Every time I close the door on reality, it comes in through the windows. pgpIaeD2IMRAz.pgp Description: PGP signature
