On May 4, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Philip Brown wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, May 4, 2012 1:42:35 PM UTC-7, Chris Price wrote:
> I'm not an expert on the topic, but my understanding is that you can't create
> a type without well-defined property/parameter names. Or, to put it a
> different way, there is cu
On Friday, May 4, 2012 1:42:35 PM UTC-7, Chris Price wrote:
>
> I'm not an expert on the topic, but my understanding is that you can't
> create a type without well-defined property/parameter names. Or, to put it
> a different way, there is currently no officially sanctioned means by which
> t
I'm not an expert on the topic, but my understanding is that you can't
create a type without well-defined property/parameter names. Or, to put it
a different way, there is currently no officially sanctioned means by which
to support dynamic property/parameter names for a type or a provider.
One w
Hi folks,
I'm trying to write a new provider, to set SMF properties, and I need help
on a piece of puppet internals syntax.
I understand(?) that generally speaking when a resource has a KNOWN set of
property names, for example, "quota" and "readonly", all you have to do to
properly handle that
