++ RIP, I've piloted mcollective but have not yet deployed as a standard
C&C tool. It is the future IMO, so if you're starting from scratch, it's
probably what you want to go with, as I sort of view puppet as not being
the tool for this job
For this stuff now, I use a combo of Nagios and capis
On Nov 2, 7:26 am, Joel Merrick wrote:
> Hi Puppeteers!
>
> I've just been speaking to Ohad on #theforeman about package
> management, specifically about generating lists of packages : version
> numbers across the estate for things like patch management.
Hi Joel,
It's not really an answer but th
Hi Richard,
On Nov 6, 12:59 am, Richard Crowley wrote:
> You can't get around running an `apt-get update` but you can do that
> from an exec resource in an earlier run stage.
>
> stage { pre: before => Stage["main"] }
> exec { "apt-get update": stage => "pre" }
>
> You'll probably want to do your
Hi Patrick,
On Nov 6, 1:25 am, Patrick wrote:
> First, if you update puppet, it's probably a good idea to update facter.
I thought that would be done by dependencies? If not, yes that is also
what I need :)
> Second, are you trying to use lenny-backports for everything or just puppet
> and rela
R P Herrold wrote:
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
Steve Hoffman wrote:
.../Package[kernel]/ensure) change from 2.6.18-194.el5 to
2.6.18-194.17.4.el5 failed: Could not update: Failed to update to
version 2.6.18-194.17.4.el5, got version 2.6.18-194.el5 instead at ...
# rpm -qa | gr
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
Steve Hoffman wrote:
.../Package[kernel]/ensure) change from 2.6.18-194.el5 to
2.6.18-194.17.4.el5 failed: Could not update: Failed to update to
version 2.6.18-194.17.4.el5, got version 2.6.18-194.el5 instead at ...
# rpm -qa | grep kernel
kernel-2.6
Steve Hoffman wrote:
.../Package[kernel]/ensure) change from 2.6.18-194.el5 to
2.6.18-194.17.4.el5 failed: Could not update: Failed to update to
version 2.6.18-194.17.4.el5, got version 2.6.18-194.el5 instead at ...
# rpm -qa | grep kernel
kernel-2.6.18-194.el5
kernel-2.6.18-194.17.4.el5
This
Jeff,
Thanks for the advice. What is the manifestdir setting for?
-eric
On Nov 5, 1:49 pm, Jeff McCune wrote:
> Eric,
>
> I recommend defining classes inside of modules rather than
> manifestdir. The two settings pertaining to environments are manifest
> and modulepath, I do not believe manife
Use the audit meta-parameter. Set it to enable and ensure, or all.
service { "foo":
audit => ['ensure','enable'];
}
http://www.puppetlabs.com/blog/all-about-auditing-with-puppet/
On Nov 5, 2010, at 3:20 PM, byron appelt wrote:
> Is it possible to use a Service resource, but not have pu
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM, byron appelt wrote:
> Is it possible to use a Service resource, but not have puppet start or
> start the service? I want to declare service resources so that I can
> easily make sure that puppet will restart them when packages are
> upgraded, etc., but I do not want
Steve Hoffman wrote:
.../Package[kernel]/ensure) change from 2.6.18-194.el5 to
2.6.18-194.17.4.el5 failed: Could not update: Failed to update to
version 2.6.18-194.17.4.el5, got version 2.6.18-194.el5 instead at ...
# rpm -qa | grep kernel
kernel-2.6.18-194.el5
kernel-2.6.18-194.17.4.el5
This
Is it possible to use a Service resource, but not have puppet start or
start the service? I want to declare service resources so that I can
easily make sure that puppet will restart them when packages are
upgraded, etc., but I do not want puppet to restart them if a sysadmin
shuts the down for some
I wanted to use puppet to update my kernel. Afterwards I wanted to
reboot the computer. I'm using centos5.5.
Googling around I came up with this:
exec { rebootDueToPackageUpdates:
command => "/sbin/reboot",
refreshonly => "true"
}
package { "kernel":
ensure => "2.6.18-194.17.
If you did not install from a package the puppet.conf file is not
created for you.
I recommend looking at puppet --genconfig and removing all pieces you
want to leave at their default values.
--
Jeff McCune - (+1-503-208-4484)
On Nov 5, 2010, at 10:17 AM, Russell Perkins
wrote:
> From the conf
Eric,
I recommend defining classes inside of modules rather than
manifestdir. The two settings pertaining to environments are manifest
and modulepath, I do not believe manifestdir is customizable per
environment.
Hope thus helps.
--
Jeff McCune - (+1-503-208-4484)
On Nov 5, 2010, at 10:33 AM, E
when running puppet agent, the 'pluginsync' option ensures that custom facts
are synced and sent with the request for catalog.
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Christopher McCrory wrote:
> Hello...
>
> When do custom facts get loaded during the client run?
>
> this is what I am doing:
> /corp/li
On Nov 5, 9:19 am, Mark_SysAdm wrote:
> What are the recommended practices for adding regular users with a
> specific group and password ? I'd like to add new users to a cluster,
> and also to append an existing ssh key to authorized_keys on all the
> cluster nodes for some users.
>
> This is th
Hello...
When do custom facts get loaded during the client run?
this is what I am doing:
/corp/lib/facter/corp.rb # has some custom facts
/openssh/manafests/init.pp # uses custom fact from corp in if
statement
Do I have to worry that the openssh class bits might be run before the
custom facts
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Matt Wallace
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've asked my company to send me on the training in London at the end of
> November, however owing to budget restraints I've been asked to investigate
> training next year instead.
>
> Does anyone know when the next round of traini
I am using environments to manage my modules. I am using manifests
out of the manifestdir as well, per environment. So my config for my
development environment looks like this:
[development]
modulepath = /usr/share/puppet/development/modules
manifestdir = /usr/share/puppet/development/mani
What are the recommended practices for adding regular users with a
specific group and password ? I'd like to add new users to a cluster,
and also to append an existing ssh key to authorized_keys on all the
cluster nodes for some users.
This is the best user add solution I've found so far, but it d
On Nov 5, 2010, at 9:52 AM, Walter Heck wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm runnign debian lenny and that has puppet 0.24.5 in it. Lenny-
> backports ahs Puppet 2.6.2 in it, which is what I want. How do I make
> puppet update itself through puppet recipes? I already had it create
> an /etc/apt/preferences,
Hi Joe,
Thanks for you update. I eventually found that the problem wasn't
Puppet at all. As it turned out, when a new WAR file is being
deployed, Tomcat will overwrite the tomcat/conf/Catalina/localhost/
ROOT.xml configuration file with the META-INF/context.xml file. This
is something that I wa
>From the configuration guide -
"The main configuration file for Puppet is /etc/puppet/puppet.conf. A
package based installation file will have created this file
automatically."
And I followed the instructions from the install guide, yet I don't
have an /etc/puppet. I have the man files and execut
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Walter Heck wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm runnign debian lenny and that has puppet 0.24.5 in it. Lenny-
> backports ahs Puppet 2.6.2 in it, which is what I want. How do I make
> puppet update itself through puppet recipes? I already had it create
> an /etc/apt/preference
Hi all,
I'm runnign debian lenny and that has puppet 0.24.5 in it. Lenny-
backports ahs Puppet 2.6.2 in it, which is what I want. How do I make
puppet update itself through puppet recipes? I already had it create
an /etc/apt/preferences, where I pin backports at 900 and lenny stable
at 700. Is tha
On Nov 5, 2010, at 5:52 AM, Maciej Skrzetuski wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I updated puppet to 2.6.2 and with the same configuration I am
> getting:
>
> err: /Stage[main]/Webspheremq/File[/tmp/mq_license/license/
> status.dat]: Could not evaluate: Could not retrieve information from
> source(s)
On Nov 4, 3:28 pm, Bakul wrote:
> I'm trying to install 2 packages where 2nd packages replaces certain
> files from first packages.
>
> package { "jboss":
> provider => yum,
> ensure => latest
>
> }
>
> package { "jboss-fix":
> provider => yum,
>
2010/11/4 hywl51
> If puppet can not fullfill this requirement, is there any other tool
> or solution to solve it?
> [...]
>
There are several solutions you can use to audit your system. You can log
all events to a central server which might not be sufficent because root can
stop reporting or yo
On Nov 4, 9:23 am, Felix Frank
wrote:
> On 11/04/2010 10:40 AM, Martin Alfke wrote:
> > I would assume that you can define a resource default:
>
> > User { ensure => absent }
>
> > and afterwards define the users you would like to be present on your system.
>
> Not at all. This default will appl
On Nov 5, 12:04 pm, Peter Meier wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> > Then I've found this thread/bugreport that explains it all :
> >http://www.mail-archive.com/puppet-b...@googlegroups.com/msg03637.html
> > But I agreee that it should probably it should print a warning o
Hello everyone,
I updated puppet to 2.6.2 and with the same configuration I am
getting:
err: /Stage[main]/Webspheremq/File[/tmp/mq_license/license/
status.dat]: Could not evaluate: Could not retrieve information from
source(s) puppet:///modules/webspheremq/status.dat at /etc/puppet/
manifests/cla
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Then I've found this thread/bugreport that explains it all :
> http://www.mail-archive.com/puppet-b...@googlegroups.com/msg03637.html
> But I agreee that it should probably it should print a warning or
> something.
can you file a feature request?
~
On Oct 27, 4:56 pm, KnightOrc wrote:
> Greeting,
>
> I'm attempting to solve a mystery we had with a puppet module we
> couldn't get to auto load.
>
> The module named / folder was called "nfs"
>
> We notice when we ran 'puppetmasterd --no-daemonize --verbose' that
> when the client connected that
On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 03:11:43AM -0700, hywl51 wrote:
> Yes, you said it. Unfortunately, we have some users running as root
> privilege on server, because they cann't work without it.
Are they admins or developers? If developers, then there is always a
way round - sudo, fakeroot, giving them v
On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 10:40:02AM +0100, Martin Alfke wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would assume that you can define a resource default:
>
> User { ensure => absent }
>
> and afterwards define the users you would like to be present on your system.
No, that would only establish the default for any user
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hello,
Am Do den 4. Nov 2010 um 11:11 schrieb hywl51:
> Yes, you said it. Unfortunately, we have some users running as root
> privilege on server, because they cann't work without it.
For me that sounds that you should never give such users root
37 matches
Mail list logo
