Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 9:41 AM, David Schmitt <da...@dasz.at> wrote:
>
>> My typical pattern in that case looks like this:
>
> Right, but what if the "something" in /etc/something is unknown and
> you need to define multiple things under /etc/something (say
> /etc/something/1 and /etc/something/2)?
> In the end, there's only going to be about 30 sites. It *could* be
> statically defined. But that's *really* hard to scale.
Either it is common to all defines, then it goes into the class or it is
per define, then it doesn't collide.
> And then I have the question of does include $something actually work
> in a define?
Yes. Both with and without $:
define test() {
include something
include "something::${name}"
}
test { foo: }
will include "something" and "something::foo", but I'd advise against
such hacks except for the most desperate cases.
Regards, DavidS
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
