Hello, Firstly, thank you John for your answer.
Le 27/08/2013 21:23, jcbollinger wrote : > I don't see anything obviously forgotten or wrong, but there are a few > strange things: It's possible. ;-) > 1. You collect the same exported File resources twice in the same > class. Really? In fact, I have tried to follow this doc: http://docs.puppetlabs.com/learning/ordering.html#chaining-arrows where you can see this example: ---------------------------------------- # 1. One declaration. file {'/tmp/test1': ensure => present, content => "Hi.", } # 2. Another one. notify {'after': message => '/tmp/test1 has already been synced.', } # 3. Ordering. File['/tmp/test1'] -> Notify['after'] ---------------------------------------- And the same page tells: "Chaining arrows can take several things as their operands: this example uses resource references, but they can also take resource declarations and resource collectors." As a result, I have deduced that this code below was correct *and* not redundant: ---------------------------------------- # 1. One declaration. file { '/usr/local/puppet_host/list': mode => 440, content => "List.\n", } # 2. Another one. File <<| tag == 'exported' |>> { mode => 0644, } # 3. Ordering. File['/usr/local/puppet_host/list'] -> File <<| tag == 'exported' |>> ---------------------------------------- Am I wrong? * file { '/tmp/a': } is a resource declaration * File['/tmp/a'] is a resource reference (for the chaining by example) but not a declaration And I thought that File <<| tag == 'exported' |>> was a resource reference but not a resource declaration. In fact, it seems to me that a resources collector is a resources declaration *and* a resource reference. This point is not very clear for me... If I understand, the code above is correct but redundant, is'nt it? And the correct and not redundant way with chaning is: ---------------------------------------- file { '/usr/local/puppet_host/list': mode => 440, content => "List.\n", } -> File <<| tag == 'exported' |>> { mode => 0644, } ---------------------------------------- Is that correct? Is it possible to separate declaration and after chaining like in the first example? Perhaps it's impossible with exported resources... > I wouldn't have expected that to be a problem, but unusual code is > more likely to tickle bugs. Yes and I don't like to tickle bugs. ;-) This is why I want to follow the good practices (when it will be clear in my spirit). > I suspect that this is indeed where your > trouble lies. It's possible. I think It's will be more clear at the end of this post. ;-) > 2. You seem to be declaring relationships that for the most part > duplicate those that Puppet can normally be relied upon to create > automatically ("autodepends"). Specifically, if a file and its parent > directory are both under management, and no relationship is otherwise > declared between them, then Puppet will automatically manage the directory > before the file. Explicitly declaring the same relationships is not an > error, however. Yes, I understand that. But sometimes we want to force ordering. > 3. You are declaring recursive directories without any 'source' > parameters. That probably does not mean what you think it means, because > in that case the recursiveness has no effect. > 4. You declare 'force => true', which is only necessary to enable > clobbering existing directories, but the other parameters don't contain > anything that could make that needful. Sorry it's my fault, I have forgotten 'purge => true' in my code. So, in fact it's: file { $managed_directories: ensure => directory, mode => 750, purge => true, recurse => true, force => true, } I hope it's consistent now. > 5. You declare that File['/usr/local/puppet_host/list'] must be applied > before any of the exported Files tagged 'exported', but that does not > appear to be needful. Yes, because my example is an "MCE" (Minimal and Complete Example that shows my problem). Indeed, in this example this is'nt needful but in my real puppet code this is needful, I want to create the exported files in an precise moment (and my reasons are valid to my mind but irrelevant in this post). > I might write class test::server more like this: > > class test::server { > file { [ '/usr/local/puppet_host', > '/usr/local/puppet_host/exported' ]: > ensure => directory, > mode => 750 > } > > file { '/usr/local/puppet_host/list': > mode => 440, > content => "List.\n", > } > > File <<| tag == 'exported' |>> { > mode => 0644, > } > } > > For explicit relationships, either declare them via the 'require' and/or > 'before' metaparameters, I don't know why, but I prefer the chaining. Perhaps because I found it's more explicit and visual (this is a personnal opinion). > or put chain operators between the declarations > above as needed. Ok, something like that if I understand: class test::server { # ... file { '/usr/local/puppet_host/list': mode => 440, content => "List.\n", } -> File <<| tag == 'exported' |>> { mode => 0644, } } Is it possible to separate declaration and ordering? In any case, indeed, with the code above, the order is correct, exactly as I want. But I want to separate declarations first and then the chaining I haven't the good order. Thank a lot for your help John. -- Francois Lafont -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
