[Puppet Users] Re: Generic fragment module?

2009-05-31 Thread Greg
If it doesn't *have* to be in rc.local, the usual method for this is to do something like: for script in /etc/rc.local.d/*; do echo -n "Processing $script" . $script echo "done." done And have Puppet create individual scripts in /etc/rc.local.d (or pick another directory name if you prefer

[Puppet Users] Re: No more than one "instances" of a type in define()?

2009-05-31 Thread Avi Miller
Paul wrote: > mysql_database { "$name_staging": ensure => present } Try: mysql_database { "${name}_staging": ensure => present } I ran into a similar problem with multiple yumrepo types in a single define. cYa, Avi --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this

[Puppet Users] Re: No more than one "instances" of a type in define()?

2009-05-31 Thread Matthew Hyclak
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Paul wrote: > > Hi folks, > > when I try to do something like: > > define railsproject($name, $uid, $gid, $userpass, $sqlpass) { >    mysql_database { "$name_staging": ensure => present } >    mysql_database { "$name_production": ensure => present} > >    more

[Puppet Users] Generic fragment module?

2009-05-31 Thread Gajillion
Hello, I've run across this several times now and I was wondering how other people handle this. I would like to manage one or more fragments of code or data in a file that has no real form to it. For instance, I have about four or five different bits of code that go into /etc/ rc.local depending

[Puppet Users] No more than one "instances" of a type in define()?

2009-05-31 Thread Paul
Hi folks, when I try to do something like: define railsproject($name, $uid, $gid, $userpass, $sqlpass) { mysql_database { "$name_staging": ensure => present } mysql_database { "$name_production": ensure => present} more stuff... } I get: Puppet::Parser::AST::Resource failed wi