On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
jcbollinger <john.bollin...@stjude.org> wrote:
> Your problem is that you are conflating distinct (for your purposes)
> aspects of your resource's state. If you care at times whether the
> variable is declared at all or not, and at other times what its value
> is, then those should be separate properties. Your resource
> declarations will then look like this:
>
> env_var { 'AWESOMENESS':
> value => 'meh',
> # optional:
> ensure => present
> }
>
> or
>
> env_var { 'AWESOMENESS':
> ensure => absent
> }
>
>
> John
>
I tend to disagree here. If the presence of an environment variable
inherently means that it has a value and the absence of a value
inherently means that the resource is absent I don't see the point in
having two properties.
I'd suggest to not use ensurable and define the ensure property
yourself:
in your type:
newproperty(:ensure) do
newvalues :absent
newvalues /.*/ # or whatever is valid for a value
end
in your provider, drop exists?, create and destroy and use
def ensure
if value = get_environment_variable(resource[:name])
value
else
:absent
end
end
def ensure=(new_value)
if new_value == :absent
destroy_environment_variable(resource[:name])
else
set_environment_variable(resource[:name], new_value)
end
end
you can then either specify
env_var { 'TMP':
ensure => 'C:\TEMP'
}
or
env_var { 'TMP':
ensure => absent,
}
-Stefan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
