Aye. The trouble with using tidy and warn_only with a repair_denied class is it wold pollute the clarity of intention.
We want the code to embody the intention. We want the intention to "shine through" the code. If we have to jump through syntactical hoops in order to get system administration tasks done, we're falling short of the author's (MB) intention for CFEngine as a knowledge mgmt tool. Yours respectfully, -at On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:53 AM, <no-re...@cfengine.com> wrote: > Forum: CFEngine Help > Subject: Re: reporting on existence of files in a directory > Author: sauer > Link to topic: https://cfengine.com/forum/read.php?3,27088,27397#msg-27397 > > Could you use your original promise with the tidy and warn_only, and add a > classes body to raise a class for "repair_denied"? Is this where > repair_denied works? > > I suppose I could just test that instead of asking the question... > > _______________________________________________ > Help-cfengine mailing list > Help-cfengine@cfengine.org > https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine -- Upcoming Trainings: "Time Management for System Administrators" 28 Sep 2012 at Ohio Linux Fest (http://ohiolinux.org/register) "Editing with vi" 28 Sep 2012 at Ohio Linux Fest (http://ohiolinux.org/register) "Automating System Administration with CFEngine 3" 22-25 Oct 2012 in Palo Alto, CA (http://cfengine.eventbrite.com/) _______________________________________________ Help-cfengine mailing list Help-cfengine@cfengine.org https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
