+1 to Paul's comments. I like having the daemon and if you really want
it the cron option is easy to configure. I'm intending to show both
in the 2nd edition of the Puppet book.
Regards
James Turnbull
On 10/04/2009, at 11:43 AM, Paul Lathrop wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Ky
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Kyle Cordes wrote:
> Luke Kanies wrote:
>> In the meantime, it's easy enough to skip the daemon mode.
>
> Maybe I'll do that next time I repackage a new version.
>
> (Or maybe, and this is a dream rather than a request, the good folks
> working on the official Deb
Luke Kanies wrote:
> In the meantime, it's easy enough to skip the daemon mode.
Maybe I'll do that next time I repackage a new version.
(Or maybe, and this is a dream rather than a request, the good folks
working on the official Debian packaging will decide that running it in
cron via a file i
On Apr 1, 2009, at 8:51 PM, Kyle Cordes wrote:
>
> Ohad Levy wrote:
>> puppetrun, and as we don't run puppetd as a daemon (running it from
>> cron
>> due to large memory consumption while idle), I went forward and
>
> Here is a semi-related thought.
>
> Without regard for memory consumption, bu
Hi Guys,
First working version can be found here:
http://github.com/ohadlevy/puppet/commit/f18af58687bbde62cfd756adaf14764c6f44e5de
I would assume many improvements could be made, patches are welcome.
I've given up on (x)inetd for now, as it seems that its impossible to
implement it purely in ru
Maybe it's the purist in me, but I don't think emergency, one-off
changes are what puppet is/was designed for. It's supposed to be a
configuration management tool, and (using your example) firefighting
death spiraling daemons is not a puppet task. (in my opinion) There
are tools that are alread
If you log a ticket I am happy to add this into the contrib directory.
Regards
James Turnbull
On 08/04/2009, at 6:00 PM, Larry Ludwig wrote:
>
> On Apr 7, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Ohad Levy wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Larry Ludwig
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> What xinetd version?
>> I
On Apr 7, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Ohad Levy wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Larry Ludwig
> wrote:
>
>
> What xinetd version?
> I wrote a simple daemon which uses puppet certificates and
> namespaceauth to allow puppetrun on cron based hosts.
>
Hi Ohad,
Can you post this somewhere?
Hi
> I think I'll enhanced my mini puppet listener script and post it if anyone
> would be interested...
that would be great. Maybe it's even something for the contrib directory?
cheers pete
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subsc
Ohad Levy schrieb am 08. Apr 2009 um 05:14:14 CEST:
> I think I'll enhanced my mini puppet listener script and post it if anyone
> would be interested...
That would be great.
Helmut
--
-
Helmut LichtenbergTel.: 05034/8
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Larry Ludwig wrote:
>
>
> What xinetd version?
I wrote a simple daemon which uses puppet certificates and namespaceauth to
allow puppetrun on cron based hosts.
cheers,
Ohad
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because yo
Hi chakkerz,
First of all thanks for putting the effort in this.
secondly, I'm not sure, but what is the difference between what you just
implemented with normal schedule meta parameter?
schedule allows you to decide how often a certain resource would be
checked/applied, and if I understood your
Hello again Ohad
I've finally found some time to play with this.
I'll give you the back of the proof of concept version and i'll write
some doco for the site when i get a chance.
I've done two facts which are probably written in the worst way
possible, but i haven't done this before :)
[r...@t
>
>
> Why Puppet cant have a push directive as well? obviously we already
> have the infrastructure to connect from the server to the clients
> (e.g. puppetrun, or my xinetd version), we already have all of the
> puppet types, so it should be easy to execute on a client (possible
> today w
sure I did, my main point is that it could be integrated withing puppet
without using additional tools...
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Marcus Vechiato wrote:
>
> Ohad,
>
> Did you see func ? https://fedorahosted.org/func/
>
> []s
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:45 AM, Geoff Newell
> wrote:
> >
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 1:29 PM, chakkerz wrote:
>
> I'll go a little deeper than before i think:
> Push vs pull - push requires each host to be accessible to a central
> service. The connection from each host will likely need to pass
> through multiple barriers such as network firewalls, on host
Ohad,
Did you see func ? https://fedorahosted.org/func/
[]s
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:45 AM, Geoff Newell wrote:
> We use something similar. All our servers have the UCE agent installed. So
> we can initiate a puppetd run via UCE when required for
> 1. Reporting
> 2. Urgent updates
> 3. Standar
We use something similar. All our servers have the UCE agent
installed. So we can initiate a puppetd run via UCE when required for
1. Reporting
2. Urgent updates
3. Standard updates.
And UCE is ratified by our security bods. Sure UCE is clunky but you
have to use the tools you've got.
Geoff.
I love this topic, first though:
> dsh, clsh, clusterit, func, hope grown scripts etc you name it, I think I
> know them all, the question remains, why shouldn't this kind of
> functionallity cant be achived with Puppet?
i don't know them all but :) i'll have to check out clsh and
clusterit ...
Mike,
dsh, clsh, clusterit, func, hope grown scripts etc you name it, I think I
know them all, the question remains, why shouldn't this kind of
functionallity cant be achived with Puppet?
as far as I see it (and probably I dont see the whole picture) most of the
internal infrastructure can suppor
Ohad Levy wrote:
> sure, I know / do this, but I though that one of the goals of puppet
> is to avoid ssh and a for loop but seriously, what happens if ssh
> doesn't work? ( I mean, usually you need push when something is
> broken)
>
> or you need to deploy something only on a subset of mach
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:51 AM, chakkerz wrote:
>
>
> for hosts in `puppetca --list --all | grep ^+ | cut -d ' ' -f 2`
> do
> ssh $hosts sudo puppetd -vt
> done
sure, I know / do this, but I though that one of the goals of puppet is to
avoid ssh and a for loop
but seriously, what happens
Hello there
This might not be a solution to your problem (from a philosophical
stance anyway), but you could grant your user to run `puppetd -vt`
without password via sudoers on all hosts.
Then you could `ssh puppetd -vt` from your workstation (or
write a wrapper that takes input from a list or
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Jason Rojas wrote:
>
> Ohad, I have been doing some thinking about this as well. I can
> definitely see situations where I need a "cap shell" type of approach
> to push a single change or something else, but usually those are for
> administration needs.
sure, this
Ohad, I have been doing some thinking about this as well. I can
definitely see situations where I need a "cap shell" type of approach
to push a single change or something else, but usually those are for
administration needs.
Now feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but puppet's whole goal
Ohad Levy wrote:
> puppetrun, and as we don't run puppetd as a daemon (running it from cron
> due to large memory consumption while idle), I went forward and
Here is a semi-related thought.
Without regard for memory consumption, but rather due to the notion that
system-wide, manageable, canon
26 matches
Mail list logo
