>
>Actually, it's pretty trivial. Just put:
>Package { require => Exec["apt-get update"] }
>in the root of your manifests. One typical place is the
>beginning of site.pp.
>
The -y flag might be needed for it to work without user interaction.
>
>Technically, I recommend putting all your package
On Jun 24, 2010, at 10:55 PM, Mathijs wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is it possible to override the behaviour of all instances of a
> resource from a module?
> I would like to have my "apt" module add a requirement for Exec["apt-
> get update"] to all Package resources.
>
> putting
> Package { require =>
Hi all,
Is it possible to override the behaviour of all instances of a
resource from a module?
I would like to have my "apt" module add a requirement for Exec["apt-
get update"] to all Package resources.
putting
Package { require => Exec["apt-get update"] }
in the module itself won't work, since
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I think that the issue is that the define isn't actually scoped under
the class, so the inherit doesn't pick up that the file is actually
under that class at all. Does that make sense?
Try writing the same statement but move the defines outside of th
Hello all,
First, I would like to thank you for your suggestion about an 'if/case'
statement. I think that should do what I want. However, I would think
that even if defines are scoped separately from classes, that wouldn't
necessarily apply in the case that I outlined below since I used a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
So, I believe (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) that defines are
actually separately scoped from the classes that contain them and cannot
currently be overridden.
The nesting that you have below is merely a convenience for writing:
define test
Hello all,
Suppose you have a resource that is created with a define such as the
following:
class test {
define myfile () {
file {
"/tmp/$name":
content => generate("/bin/echo","$name");
}
}
myfile {
"foo":
}
}
And it turns
