This happed to concern the LVM module, but I don't think that is important in
this case.
What is the difference between using -> and => to enforce a requirement that
one class cannot be applied if the other fails to be asserted?
In this case I have:-
mount { "/addon/work2" :
device => "/dev/vga/work2",
ensure => mounted,
}
filesystem { "/dev/vga/work2" :
ensure => present,
}
Filesystem["/dev/vga/work2"] -> Mount["/addon/work2"]
All the stansas have additional parameters as needed, but do not have any
"require =>" statements, this being left to the ordering statements with "->".
Is this a mistake? I have just come across a machine that had failed to ensure
the existence of the file system (the disk was too small) but had then gone on
to generate a mount in /etc/fstab. As a result the machine needed manual
intervention. Would using "require =>" have behaved differently?
Chris Ritson (Computing Officer and School Safety Officer)
Room 707, Claremont Tower, EMAIL: c.r.rit...@ncl.ac.uk
School of Computing Science, PHONE: +44 191 222 8175
Newcastle University, FAX : +44 191 222 8232
Newcastle upon Tyne, UK NE1 7RU. WEB : http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/
--
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.
