[Puppet Users] Re: Puppet's CA with an external issued CA-Certificate

[Eric Sorenson]

This is not fully supported yet, but can work with a couple of caveats - 
the question has come up a few times recently.

Can you please try my draft HOWTO documentation at this gist, and let me 
know how it works for you? You can reply here or comment on the gist if 
there are specific lines that you run into trouble with.

https://gist.github.com/ahpook/06d4cfda1d68c08bc82fbfdc40123b28

--eric0

On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 11:17:37 PM UTC-7, Christoph Fiehe wrote:
>
> This is exactly the use case, I require in my scenario. I must have 
> several Puppet CAs, each acting as intermediate CA that has an individual 
> CA certificate signed by a single root CA. Each intermediate CA signes the 
> certificates of some puppet agents. I have created a small picture to show 
> you how the scenario should look like.The root puppetmaster acts as a 
> bootstrapping node that should set up different nodes as puppetmaster when 
> someone assignes the puppetmaster role to this new node.
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> Has anybody an idea, if this scenario can be realized with the help of 
> Puppet? The most interesting question is how Puppet behaves when you assign 
> "ca = true" to an agent node and assign "ca_server =  CA>".
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/d3846c57-7694-4fa7-b1e8-60dbb830f879%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Puppet Users] Re: Puppet's CA with an external issued CA-Certificate

[Christoph Fiehe]

This is exactly the use case, I require in my scenario. I must have several 
Puppet CAs, each acting as intermediate CA that has an individual CA 
certificate signed by a single root CA. Each intermediate CA signes the 
certificates of some puppet agents. I have created a small picture to show 
you how the scenario should look like.The root puppetmaster acts as a 
bootstrapping node that should set up different nodes as puppetmaster when 
someone assignes the puppetmaster role to this new node.





Has anybody an idea, if this scenario can be realized with the help of 
Puppet? The most interesting question is how Puppet behaves when you assign 
"ca = true" to an agent node and assign "ca_server = ".

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/c4e2777c-b21b-4923-b12c-27eaec0377ea%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Puppet Users] Load Balancer for Puppet Master

[Braian Fabián Leiva]

I'm trying to setup a Load Balancer in front of some Compile Masters and 
the Puppet docs says that I can achieve that either with raw TCP proxying, 
or acting as its own SSL endpoint[1]. If I configure the LB with SSL and 
SNAT will that work? Is it better to use bridging instead?

[1] 
https://docs.puppet.com/guides/scaling_multiple_masters.html#option-3-use-a-load-balancer

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/5ddb5120-4f41-4404-9f91-c177f7651757%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Puppet Users] Writing my first role

[Alex Samad]

Hi

So greenfield install. I'm a newbie.

I have setup the latest puppet open source, using r10k + git. I have 
started with the control-repo.

I have my 'alex' branch/environment.

I can see there is a directory 
site/profile/manifests

I presume I can put my "code" here for example

cat  site/profile/manifests/mypuppet.pp

class profile::mypuppet {
include ::puppet_agent;

}
 



What I would like todo is set the default environment in puppet.conf via 
this model

Or even go further and install a complete puppet.conf.

How do I assign the profile::mypuppet to all notes in this environment 

Would/could I add it to hieradata/common.yaml with something like

class:
-profile::mypuppet


Although I also realize or at least plan to use roles.  idea being a node 
gets a roles which is made up of all the relevant profiles.

Alex

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/9e4434ee-471f-4065-a1d1-435275632dfd%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [Puppet Users] external node classifier my setup

[Rob Nelson]

The values they receive for a particular module parameter does not need to
have anything to do with their environment. That can come from hiera.

On Thursday, June 23, 2016, Alex Samad  wrote:

> On 24 June 2016 at 00:16, jcbollinger  > wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 1:30:37 AM UTC-5, Alex Samad wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> So I am a bit of a newbie.  My assumption was to setup using a master
> >> puppet server. But I wanted to make sure that environment was handled
> >> by the master puppet - I have control over that and I might not be
> >> able to exclude control over the managed box from other users (dam
> >> developers !).
> >>
> >
> >
> > I'm inclined to agree that central control is to be preferred.  Do be
> aware,
> > however, that control over node environment is mostly a management
> feature,
> > not a security feature.  Your master can control what resources it
> records
> > in nodes' catalogs, but those nodes' admins can disable Puppet, make it
> run
> > in --noop mode, make it present false facts to the master, and many other
> > things.  Do not grant privileges to people whom you do not trust, and do
> not
> > trust anyone any more than you need to do.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> I wanted some way to test what I was doing was correct.
> >>
> >
> >
> > And you found one.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> "
> >> If your nodes care deeply about which Puppet environment they are
> >> assigned to, then you are doing something wrong.
> >> "
> >>
> >> so I am planning on having atleast a production, sim , inf, non prod
> >> and a dev environment.
> >>
> >> I would presume a box would want to know which environment they are
> >> in, because in prod they might be on  a certain rpm / module or
> >> certain config - lets say for example MOTD.
> >>
> >> But i might be wrong ?
> >>
> >
> >
> > In the first place, I recommend not using multiple Puppet environments
> > unless you have a Puppet-related reason for doing so.  The prime reason
> in
> > this category would be that you want to allow for use of different
> versions
> > of the same Puppet modules to be used with one group of nodes than with
> > another.  When no such reason applies, environments do not provide a
> benefit
> > commensurate with the extra complication and work they involve.
> >
> > In the second place, yes, you're wrong.  The Puppet environment to which
> a
> > node is assigned affects the details of the catalogs built for it, which
> in
> > turn affects those nodes' configurations.  The master makes decisions
> based
> > on node environment, but nodes need not and should not care why they are
> > configured as they are.  For example, nodes do not need to know or care
> > about the meaning of the contents of their MOTD; they just need to
> present
> > the text -- whatever it is -- to users when they log in and when they ask
>
> I agree but how do you make them difference for different nodes, if I
> specify a group of nodes that have a specific MOTD... the nodes don't
> care but ( i was using it as an example). maybe a better one would be
> say smtp setup - all nodes have it, non prod must point to the non
> prod smtp server.
>
>
> > for it.  Likewise, they do not need to know why they are configured to
> > access a particular database server, why they have the particular vhosts
> > configured that they do, why they have the particular users and passwords
> > they have, why they mount the particular remote file systems they mount,
> > etc..
> >
>
>
> Sorry our argument seems counter intuitive.  Maybe I am miss understanding.
>
> For example I have had a lot of issue with winbind. (centos 6.x).  So
> my thought is
>
> production environment - has all the prod nodes.
> It has a specific version of winbind, might be old but it works
>
> My other environments have different newer versions of winbind.
>
>
> if you can explain how I can do that with 1 environment . happy to
> learn. I haven't done a puppet setup before - which is why i'm asking
> and questioning.
>
>
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> My thought had been to align production environment with production
> >> server, infra with infra servers and non prod non infra in the non
> >> prod environment.
> >
> >
> >
> > Even if you ignore my advice and do that, what I'm saying is that you
> should
> > not identify Puppet's sense of "environment" with any external concept
> going
> > by the same name.  I maintain that nodes probably don't need to be
> > explicitly aware of the label of their operational environment, either,
> but
> > especially if you're exerting central control over Puppet environments,
> > there is no reason for nodes to care how Puppet labels those
> environments.
>
> so environments should only really align with puppets production code
> and none prod code. and by non prod code you are talking only about
> puppet module code ?
>
>
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> > Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
> > To unsubscrib

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: external node classifier my setup

[Alex Samad]

On 24 June 2016 at 00:16, jcbollinger  wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 1:30:37 AM UTC-5, Alex Samad wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> So I am a bit of a newbie.  My assumption was to setup using a master
>> puppet server. But I wanted to make sure that environment was handled
>> by the master puppet - I have control over that and I might not be
>> able to exclude control over the managed box from other users (dam
>> developers !).
>>
>
>
> I'm inclined to agree that central control is to be preferred.  Do be aware,
> however, that control over node environment is mostly a management feature,
> not a security feature.  Your master can control what resources it records
> in nodes' catalogs, but those nodes' admins can disable Puppet, make it run
> in --noop mode, make it present false facts to the master, and many other
> things.  Do not grant privileges to people whom you do not trust, and do not
> trust anyone any more than you need to do.
>
>
>>
>> I wanted some way to test what I was doing was correct.
>>
>
>
> And you found one.
>
>
>>
>> "
>> If your nodes care deeply about which Puppet environment they are
>> assigned to, then you are doing something wrong.
>> "
>>
>> so I am planning on having atleast a production, sim , inf, non prod
>> and a dev environment.
>>
>> I would presume a box would want to know which environment they are
>> in, because in prod they might be on  a certain rpm / module or
>> certain config - lets say for example MOTD.
>>
>> But i might be wrong ?
>>
>
>
> In the first place, I recommend not using multiple Puppet environments
> unless you have a Puppet-related reason for doing so.  The prime reason in
> this category would be that you want to allow for use of different versions
> of the same Puppet modules to be used with one group of nodes than with
> another.  When no such reason applies, environments do not provide a benefit
> commensurate with the extra complication and work they involve.
>
> In the second place, yes, you're wrong.  The Puppet environment to which a
> node is assigned affects the details of the catalogs built for it, which in
> turn affects those nodes' configurations.  The master makes decisions based
> on node environment, but nodes need not and should not care why they are
> configured as they are.  For example, nodes do not need to know or care
> about the meaning of the contents of their MOTD; they just need to present
> the text -- whatever it is -- to users when they log in and when they ask

I agree but how do you make them difference for different nodes, if I
specify a group of nodes that have a specific MOTD... the nodes don't
care but ( i was using it as an example). maybe a better one would be
say smtp setup - all nodes have it, non prod must point to the non
prod smtp server.


> for it.  Likewise, they do not need to know why they are configured to
> access a particular database server, why they have the particular vhosts
> configured that they do, why they have the particular users and passwords
> they have, why they mount the particular remote file systems they mount,
> etc..
>


Sorry our argument seems counter intuitive.  Maybe I am miss understanding.

For example I have had a lot of issue with winbind. (centos 6.x).  So
my thought is

production environment - has all the prod nodes.
It has a specific version of winbind, might be old but it works

My other environments have different newer versions of winbind.


if you can explain how I can do that with 1 environment . happy to
learn. I haven't done a puppet setup before - which is why i'm asking
and questioning.




>
>>
>> My thought had been to align production environment with production
>> server, infra with infra servers and non prod non infra in the non
>> prod environment.
>
>
>
> Even if you ignore my advice and do that, what I'm saying is that you should
> not identify Puppet's sense of "environment" with any external concept going
> by the same name.  I maintain that nodes probably don't need to be
> explicitly aware of the label of their operational environment, either, but
> especially if you're exerting central control over Puppet environments,
> there is no reason for nodes to care how Puppet labels those environments.

so environments should only really align with puppets production code
and none prod code. and by non prod code you are talking only about
puppet module code ?


>
>
> John
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/puppet-users/mZBLZQKZ0xM/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/df3051e0-c516-4e17-8835-9ebabb82ae5e%40googlegroups.com.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message bec

[Puppet Users] SRV records not working correctly

[Matthew Ceroni]

I am attempting to load balance two master servers via SRV records.

https://gist.github.com/cyrus-mc/fefef0d07dcb6fe211ad8514ce2c710a

As you can see at line 6 it finds 2 records for the specified SRV. At line 
15 it makes a connection to one of the Puppet servers.

However at line 29 it connects to https://puppet:8140 which is the default 
puppet server if one isn't specified. 

Further down the connection details you see it does another SRV lookup 
(line 76), finds 2 records (as it should) and makes a connection to one of 
them for catalog compilation.

So SRV records appear to be working a little. Not sure what is happening 
around line 29 to cause it to just try and connect to puppet.

Thanks

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/e9ea39d8-c8cc-4197-a6cd-9372137b3a5d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [Puppet Users] Puppet enterprise 2016.1.1 installation failing with following error

[Ali]

Update:

There were some issue in crontab , after fixing those error got fixed 

On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 12:41:39 PM UTC-4, Ali wrote:

> Nothing is in  that  password check log file

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/10414aeb-59a7-4203-884c-f140826e27a8%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Puppet Users] EAR application deploy in Local Weblogic

[Mauro Fiorin Jr]

I'm trying to deploy an EAR on a existing 
domain: /servers/Oracle/Middleware/user_projects/domains/MyApp

I have Weblogic Server configured and running correctly on my station.


  dtp_referencia::util::download_artifact { 'myappejbear':
gav  => $gav,
packaging=> $packaging,
local_source => $local_source,
classifier   => $classifier,
nexus_url=> $nexus_url,
repository   => $repository,
owner=> $owner,
group=> $group,
  } 
...
  wls_setting { 'default':
user  => 'root',
weblogic_home_dir => "/servers/Oracle/Middleware/wlserver_12.1",
connect_url   => "t3://127.0.0.1:7001",
weblogic_user => "weblogic",
weblogic_password => "weblogic00",
  } -> 
  
  wls_deployment { "myappejb:
ensure => 'present',
deploymenttype => 'AppDeployment',
target => ['AdminServer'],
targettype => ['Server'],
localpath  => "/var/install/myeappejb.ear",
  }

My console errors:

log-puppet-local  | Error: Could not prefetch wls_deployment provider 
'simple': end of file reached
log-puppet-local  | Error: Could not set 'present' on ensure: Broken pipe 
at 138:/puppet/workspace/myapp/manifests/deploy/negocio.pp
log-puppet-local  | Error: Could not set 'present' on ensure: Broken pipe 
at 138:/puppet/workspace/myapp/manifests/deploy/negocio.pp
log-puppet-local  | Wrapped exception:
log-puppet-local  | Broken pipe
log-puppet-local  | Error: 
/Stage[main]/Inss_sirc::Deploy::Negocio/Wls_deployment[sircejb.ear]/ensure: 
change from absent to present failed: Could not set 'present' on ensure: 
Broken pipe at 138:/puppet/workspace/myapp/manifests/deploy/negocio.pp

Any ideas?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/1c856c51-454d-42ff-b677-457a884f0983%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Hiera lookup fail : doesan't find json file

[Henrik Lindberg]

On 23/06/16 07:45, chris wrote:



On Thursday, 23 June 2016 11:06:54 UTC+10, chris wrote:

So as you can see from above, it prefixes each keyname with the dir and
appends '.json', as it should BUT only if keyname/data src has a numeric
digit in it! Is this a bug in puppet??
Or am I missing something?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/d2c42889-29a2-47f4-9dcd-b4d14917b611%40googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


What happens if you change '.' to '_' for that particular file?
(I wonder if there is a bug in the handling of '.')

- henrik

--

Visit my Blog "Puppet on the Edge"
http://puppet-on-the-edge.blogspot.se/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet 
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/e9b28bd8-8a5e-a072-6572-2134c012dc45%40puppet.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: external node classifier my setup

[jcbollinger]

On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 1:30:37 AM UTC-5, Alex Samad wrote:
>
> Hi 
>
> So I am a bit of a newbie.  My assumption was to setup using a master 
> puppet server. But I wanted to make sure that environment was handled 
> by the master puppet - I have control over that and I might not be 
> able to exclude control over the managed box from other users (dam 
> developers !). 
>
>

I'm inclined to agree that central control is to be preferred.  Do be 
aware, however, that control over node environment is mostly a *management* 
feature, not a *security* feature.  Your master can control what resources 
it records in nodes' catalogs, but those nodes' admins can disable Puppet, 
make it run in --noop mode, make it present false facts to the master, and 
many other things.  Do not grant privileges to people whom you do not 
trust, and do not trust anyone any more than you need to do.

 

> I wanted some way to test what I was doing was correct. 
>
>

And you found one.

 

> " 
> If your nodes care deeply about which Puppet environment they are 
> assigned to, then you are doing something wrong. 
> " 
>
> so I am planning on having atleast a production, sim , inf, non prod 
> and a dev environment. 
>
> I would presume a box would want to know which environment they are 
> in, because in prod they might be on  a certain rpm / module or 
> certain config - lets say for example MOTD. 
>
> But i might be wrong ? 
>
>

In the first place, I recommend *not* using multiple Puppet environments 
unless you have a Puppet-related reason for doing so.  The prime reason in 
this category would be that you want to allow for use of different versions 
of the same Puppet modules to be used with one group of nodes than with 
another.  When no such reason applies, environments do not provide a 
benefit commensurate with the extra complication and work they involve.

In the second place, yes, you're wrong.  The Puppet environment to which a 
node is assigned affects the details of the catalogs built for it, which in 
turn affects those nodes' configurations.  The *master* makes decisions 
based on node environment, but nodes need not and should not care why they 
are configured as they are.  For example, nodes do not need to know or care 
about the meaning of the contents of their MOTD; they just need to present 
the text -- whatever it is -- to users when they log in and when they ask 
for it.  Likewise, they do not need to know why they are configured to 
access a particular database server, why they have the particular vhosts 
configured that they do, why they have the particular users and passwords 
they have, why they mount the particular remote file systems they mount, 
*etc*..

 

> My thought had been to align production environment with production 
> server, infra with infra servers and non prod non infra in the non 
> prod environment. 
>


Even if you ignore my advice and do that, what I'm saying is that you 
should not identify Puppet's sense of "environment" with any external 
concept going by the same name.  I maintain that nodes probably don't need 
to be explicitly aware of the label of their operational environment, 
either, but especially if you're exerting central control over Puppet 
environments, there is no reason for nodes to care how Puppet labels those 
environments.


John

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/df3051e0-c516-4e17-8835-9ebabb82ae5e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Puppet Users] Re: get one file with all server in puppet (export resource)

[jcbollinger]

On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 4:17:39 AM UTC-5, Andreas Dvorak wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> now I have change it a little, but it still does not work.
>
> class check_mk::agent::serverlist {
>   @@server_list { "$::hostname":
> filename => '/tmp/checkmkhosts',
>   }
>
>   define server_list ( $filename ) {
> ensure_resource ( 'file', $filename, {} )
>   }
>
> }
>
>

Do not nest classes or defines inside classes.  The fact that Puppet 
accepts nesting at all is essentially a legacy feature.  Put each class 
definition and each defined type definition in its own file.

Furthermore, do not use the defined() or ensure_resource() functions, at 
least not until you've a lot more experience.  Approaches based on these 
functions at minimum have evaluation-order dependencies, which can bite 
you.  They provide a means to paper over your problem instead of actually 
fixing it.

 

> class check_mk::server::serverlist {
>   Server_list <<| |>>
> }
>
> Error 400 on SERVER: Resource type server_list doesn't exist
>
>

The name of the defined type nested in your previous class is 
check_mk::agent::serverlist::server_list, so a reference to it would be 
spelled 
Check_mk::Agent::Serverlist::Server_list. But changing that will not solve 
your problem, because the file you end up managing will be empty.

The first thing you need to appreciate is that exported (and virtual) 
resources have no magic.  In particular, above all else they are resources, 
with substantially all the characteristics and constraints of resources.  
In particular, they must have unique names and titles; for exported 
resources, that applies both in the context from which they are exported 
and in the ones into which they are imported.  It does not generally make 
sense to export a resource unless that resource is uniquely characteristic 
of the node whose catalog exports it.

The canonical example for exported resources is probably managing /etc/hosts 
by exporting and collecting Host resources.  Note in particular that 
resources exchanged for that purpose represent individual entries in the 
hosts file, no one of them represents the *whole* hosts file.  That case 
depends on the Host type knowing how to identify and manage individual host 
entries.

I see at least three approaches that could work for you:

   1. Write a custom type and provider, along lines parallel to the Host 
   type.  This is far and away the cleanest to use, but it's a fair amount of 
   work, and probably not a good place for an inexperienced Puppeteer to start.
   2. Get the Concat module from the forge, and use that.  Your nodes can 
   export Concat::Fragment resources representing the parts (lines) of the 
   file, and Concat provides for assembling them into a single file on the 
   node that collects those fragments.  This would be my recommendation.
   3. Even simpler, however, would be to install the puppetlabs-stdlib 
   module and use its File_line resource as the one you export and collect.

Note well the common characteristic of all of those approaches: they 
provide for modelling the separate parts of the target file separately, so 
that each node that exports a part exports only that part for which it is 
responsible.


John

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/adbd969d-89b0-4d14-b880-0762efdbf47a%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [Puppet Users] Docs Typo (I think)

[Dan White]

Done.

https://tickets.puppetlabs.com/browse/DOCUMENT-562
Dan White | d_e_wh...@icloud.com

“Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the 
universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.”  (Bill Waterson: Calvin & 
Hobbes)

On Jun 22, 2016, at 03:50 PM, Kylo Ginsberg  wrote:

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Dan White  wrote:

https://docs.puppet.com/puppet/4.5/reference/config_file_main.html#example-master-config

Example master config
[main]
certname = puppetmaster01.example.com
server = puppet
environment = production
runinterval = 1h
strict_variables = true
trusted

[master]
dns_alt_names = 
puppetmaster01,puppetmaster01.example.com,puppet,puppet.example.com
reports = puppetdb
storeconfigs_backend = puppetdb
storeconfigs = true
environment_timeout = unlimited
What's with that "trusted" under [main] ?
Caused an error when I copied it and there is no reference to such a config 
setting in the docs.
That does look wrong. Thanks for pointing that out!

Do you mind filing a quick ticket at 
https://tickets.puppetlabs.com/browse/DOCUMENT?

Thanks,
Kylo 


Dan White | d_e_wh...@icloud.com

“Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the 
universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.”  (Bill Waterson: Calvin & 
Hobbes)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet 
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/40413bad-a1bc-49a4-b9bd-78fa22c3270d%40me.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Kylo Ginsberg | k...@puppet.com | irc: kylo | twitter: @kylog

PuppetConf 2016, October 17-21, San Diego, California
Early Birds save $350 - Register by June 30th

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet 
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/CALsUZFFSs1UDakcUvJrs0MAPGHqoKD8z8H4d%2BYRfuM%2BBKAjsGA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet 
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/3fb7aa9e-f45d-4755-ba93-82a6249266b4%40me.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Puppet Users] Re: get one file with all server in puppet (export resource)

[Andreas Dvorak]

Hi,

now I have change it a little, but it still does not work.

class check_mk::agent::serverlist {
  @@server_list { "$::hostname":
filename => '/tmp/checkmkhosts',
  }

  define server_list ( $filename ) {
ensure_resource ( 'file', $filename, {} )
  }

}

class check_mk::server::serverlist {
  Server_list <<| |>>
}

Error 400 on SERVER: Resource type server_list doesn't exist

Andreas

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/76d56d21-bcf4-4610-9851-cab3b27cbf83%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.