On 10/14/2012 08:40 AM, Gonzalo Servat wrote:
I would certainly +1 this method! I was bitten by the puppet 3.x packages for 2 reasons. The first one is that in my kickstart configs, I have "puppet" specified as a package which gets installed during installation and performs some trickery to run Puppet for the first time on the client, and get the certificate signed. As Puppet 3.x was now being installed by yum, it broke our installations. My workaround was to set "puppet-2.7" in the kickstart file, but far from ideal :(
Yeah, same thing here. So we decided to upgrade instead of changing kickstarts...
It looks like Puppetlabs are well aware of this issue, so I look forward to the resolution. Personally, I think packages should be grouped in a logical manner, so that any package in the group will not (or should not) break functionality if upgraded.
But as I've said already, multiple versions in the same repo would enable that behaviour, but would bring another set of problems. So I still urge puppetlabs to consider 'repository per version' kind of solution.
-- Jakov Sosic www.srce.unizg.hr -- 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.
