Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Controlling order of execution

2011-08-21 Thread Brian Troutwine
Hmm, in that specific situation, sure. I can see how some of these would be an odd fit for the language as currently implemented, I sure would like: * transactional builds ( so an error does not leave a box in an inconsistent, half configured state ) * more of an ability to specify error state

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Controlling order of execution

2011-08-20 Thread Denmat
Well you can on some resources types, like an exec, but not on file resources - which is annoying sometimes. With file resources it's different but it would be great to have an 'onlyif' parameter. So, you can turn your package install definition into an exec that has a pre-condition. exec {aptp

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Controlling order of execution

2011-08-20 Thread Brian Troutwine
I wouldn't wish Puppet to play guess the quantum cat but, rather, to have the agent's application of its catalog error in a predictable fashion. I'd like to express the pre-condition that if /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/01proxy exists in the filesystem then the installation of package apt-cacher should erro

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Controlling order of execution

2011-08-20 Thread Denmat
Hi, No, you can only declare the state of a resource once. It can't be present and absent at the same time. Den On 21/08/2011, at 8:50, Brian Troutwine wrote: > PEBKAC, all. > > My images were already tainted with 01proxy, so it existed before the > installation of the apt-cacher. Question: