Thanks for the info.
Do you have more descriptive explanation on the anchor pattern? From what
you have pasted on this link isn't sound descriptive. Or can you give me a
pattern of codes instead? thanks!
On Tuesday, 6 November 2012 13:07:53 UTC+8, Nick Fagerlund wrote:
>
> Yup, this is the c
Yup, this is the classes-can't-contain-classes problem. It sucks, everyone
runs into it eventually, and it's explained in detail here:
http://docs.puppetlabs.com/puppet/3/reference/lang_containment.html#known-issues
http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/8040
You'll need to use the "anchor patt
On Jul 23, 11:17 pm, Greg wrote:
> Simple answer - no. Dependencies can only be between objects in
> 0.24.x...
For what it's worth, this is reputed to be a new feature of Puppet
0.25, which release is currently in beta testing.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received
Simple answer - no. Dependencies can only be between objects in
0.24.x...
I believe (but haven't seen for myself yet) that there are changes to
this coming as its a frequently requested feature...
I used to think it was a good idea, then I sat and thought about it
for a while and now I don't act
Dan,
Puppet builds a directed graph of resources based on the explicit
relationships you create.
There is no guarantee of consistent ordering for resources at the same level
in the graph.
Use the before and require that Ian suggests to explicitly specify the
ordering relationship.
Regards,
Andr
Not sure what is 'best practice', but maybe this will help a little.
Please keep in mind, I'm new to puppet too.
You might look at:
http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/TypeReference#available-metaparameters
specifically require and before
Possibly in the autofs class, resources might req
