On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Brian Mathis <brian.mat...@gmail.com> wrote: > The issue with Puppet (as I understand it) is that you can't have > multiple classes managing the same resource. So if something is > handling /etc/crontab, something else can't. Editfiles is a whole > other subject. > > However, many OSes provide an /etc/cron.d directory, and each file in > there is a standalone resource that controls cron. IMO, this is where > those sorts of things should be going, not editing the /etc/crontab > file.
Here is my real-world use-case, and the reason I left puppet: smb.conf. My samba server can be a pdc, a member server, a file server, a print server, a home server, a profile server, etc. and any combination of those. Most of the configuration is identical for all of those classes so it would be a great burden to create a unique file for every possible combination and an even greater burden if I needed to update just one value in all those files. So I use a template and modify it based on the classes that are defined. In this case all the modifications are done in one policy; but what about ldap.conf, which may be different if the server is a samba server, a shell server, a web server, and/or a member of the kerberos realm? Having conf.d directories helps a lot, but it eliminate the need for strong template support. -- Perfection is just a word I use occasionally with mustard. --Atom Powers-- _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lopsa.org http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
