On 02/01/2010 09:11 AM, jcbollinger wrote: > I'm inclined to think, then, that PkgGroup::InstallPkg::disabled is > not being included in the manifest for the affected node. Perhaps > it's part of a conditional branch that's not taken?
This is exactly what it seems is going on; I don't see it referenced in the debug output at all. > Moreover, what you would achieve with this if it were working is > different from what you initially asked for: in this case, Puppet > definitely *does* care whether the package is installed on the node, > for it removes the package if it is present. I realize this; I was just trying to test something that would be more actionable than "ensure => undef" (which Dan clarified doesn't do what I think it should). > Since this is a hack anyway, perhaps it would be quicker and easier to > comment out the relevant include statement, or to use an if statement > to disable it for the particular node in question. > Since it's part of my base node that every box inherits, it's pretty painful to just ignore this one class. And as Dan said, this type of thing should be easily doable. -Doug
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
