On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 09:26, Peter Berghold wrote:
>
> Also in 2.6 I have started using "stages" in my setups In my site.pp file
> I have something that looks like this:
>
> stage { preamble: before => Stage[main] }
> stage { postamble: require => Stage[main] }
>
> class {
> "foo" : s
Thanks John... using before worked.
I'm new to puppet and I found the independent resource chaining stuff
before I found 'before' which I note is not mentioned anywhere in the
docs for exec.
is this a doc bug or is it a generic option available with all
resources?
On Jan 22, 4:36 am, jcbollinger
https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
What would be a better name for "--test"?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroup
It's particularly difficult to understand what's going on with a given
bug report when the log/manifest/terminal output is all being
mis-interpreted as Markdown text.
We'll definitely try and make this more obvious somewhere, but it
really does help immensely if you use the and HTML tags
in your
https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
What would be a better name for "--test"?
Using Gentoo's emerge as an example, how about --oneshot?
Cheers,
Adam.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet
On Jan 22, 2011 8:46 AM, "Jason Wright" wrote:
>
> Lately our puppetmasters have been returning 500 errors at a
> reasonably high rate. On any given day, 200-300 (out of many
> thousands) of our clients are reporting that they've received a 500
> during a run. So far, the only firm reports I've
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>> https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>>
>> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>>
>> What would be a better name for "--test"?
>
> Using Gentoo's emerge as an example, how about --oneshot?
It's more than that though.
--on
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 1:17 PM, russell.fulton
wrote:
> Thanks John... using before worked.
>
> I'm new to puppet and I found the independent resource chaining stuff
> before I found 'before' which I note is not mentioned anywhere in the
> docs for exec.
>
> is this a doc bug or is it a generic o
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Nick Fagerlund
wrote:
> On Jan 18, 4:06 pm, Nigel Kersten wrote:
>> That's definitely a bug. We moved to supporting lib/ in 0.25.x, we
>> just must have missed making this work on the client side.
>
> Specifically, it looks like bug 4180 (http://projects.puppetlab
I was thinking '--update' as that is what it does but then that doesn't
describe the '--one-time' nature of it explicitly.
I always felt funny updating hosts with 'test' though :)
Hard one.
Den
On 24/01/2011, at 8:33, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>
> T
On Jan 23, 2011, at 1:50 PM, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>> https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>>
>> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>>
>> What would be a better name for "--test"?
>
> Using Gentoo's emerge as an example, how about --oneshot?
To me, this sounds too similar to
My inclination is to say that "ontime" or "verbose" have stolen the name for
another concept; perhaps "interactive" covers the standard use-case well
enough?
Daniel
On Jan 23, 2011 2:45 PM, "Patrick" wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 1:50 PM, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>
>>> https://projects.puppetlabs.com
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Pittman wrote:
> My inclination is to say that "ontime" or "verbose" have stolen the name
> for another concept; perhaps "interactive" covers the standard use-case well
> enough?
>
> Daniel
> On Jan 23, 2011 2:45 PM, "Patrick" wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2011
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Dan Bode wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Pittman
> wrote:
>>
>> My inclination is to say that "ontime" or "verbose" have stolen the name
>> for another concept; perhaps "interactive" covers the standard use-case well
>> enough?
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>
and what is the current functionality for the --test option?
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Dan Bode wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Pittman
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> My inclination is to say that "ontime" or "verbose" hav
On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:02 PM, James Louis wrote:
> and what is the current functionality for the --test option?
To quote Nigel:
--onetime
--no-daemonize
--ignorecache
--verbose
--no-usecacheonfailure
and I think I'm missing some newer additions too.
--
You received this message because you ar
that tells what options are applied when --test is used but doesn't explain
the functionality of --test (i.e. --test is an option to enable the puppet
agent to test it's connection to the puppet master by turning on the
following options... blah blah blah)
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Patrick
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 03:48:16PM -0800, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Dan Bode wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Pittman
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> My inclination is to say that "ontime" or "verbose" have stolen the name
> >> for another concept; perhaps "in
On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:47 PM, James Louis wrote:
> that tells what options are applied when --test is used but doesn't explain
> the functionality of --test (i.e. --test is an option to enable the puppet
> agent to test it's connection to the puppet master by turning on the
> following options.
exactly. to what purpose?
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Patrick wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:47 PM, James Louis wrote:
>
> > that tells what options are applied when --test is used but doesn't
> explain the functionality of --test (i.e. --test is an option to enable the
> puppet agent to
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 4:53 PM, James Louis wrote:
> exactly. to what purpose?
To trigger an immediate run on a client with the common options used
when testing a real run, not a noop run.
If there was a clear word that described this functionality, we
probably wouldn't be having this discussio
The Fedora 13 SRPMs backport pretty easily, and you get the advantage
of Ruby 1.8.6.
-Eric
On Jan 22, 11:32 am, Ohad Levy wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:59 PM, R.I.Pienaar wrote:
> > hey,
>
> > - Original Message -
> > > Is their a mcollective rpm for rhel4? If not, is their a src
so the actual changes take place, if any, during a test vs a noop which does
not let the actual changes take place. So this would be used primarily for
configuration testing? Or perhaps for troubleshooting? Or both?
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at
I made some more research on this problem and found another one. I
think it's linked.
The 30th day of puppet (the one the more on the left side in puppet-
dashboard) is slowly decrasing in term of successfull reports. So the
chart for this day is slowly decreasing as long as the day go on.
I guess
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 5:34 PM, James Louis wrote:
> so the actual changes take place, if any, during a test vs a noop which does
> not let the actual changes take place. So this would be used primarily for
> configuration testing? Or perhaps for troubleshooting? Or both?
Yes, both.
Due to it b
I can tell you that for me, and for my group, it's a halfway step
between reloading Puppet and watching the logs, and a full --debug --
no-daemonize run.
So for instance, when they're troubleshooting a bug in a newly-written
or modified class, I suggest a puppetd -tv run to just output the
errors
so the purpose of having a noop is to run the same test but to not actually
make any changes. do we get the same debug messages, etc?
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 7:58 PM, eshamow wrote:
> I can tell you that for me, and for my group, it's a halfway step
> between reloading Puppet and watching the lo
No, because sometimes making the changes causes the error.
For instance, if you are using a File resource to create a file in a read-only
file-system (which isn't possible) the resource will tell you it plans to make
a file when run in noop, and give you no errors. When not run in noop it will
On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:53 PM, James Louis wrote:
> exactly. to what purpose?
>
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Patrick wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:47 PM, James Louis wrote:
>
> > that tells what options are applied when --test is used but doesn't explain
> > the functionality of --tes
On Jan 23, 2011, at 5:58 PM, eshamow wrote:
> I can tell you that for me, and for my group, it's a halfway step
> between reloading Puppet and watching the logs, and a full --debug --
> no-daemonize run.
>
> So for instance, when they're troubleshooting a bug in a newly-written
> or modified cla
On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:49 PM, Stefan Schulte wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 03:48:16PM -0800, Nigel Kersten wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Dan Bode wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Pittman
>>> wrote:
My inclination is to say that "ontime" or "verbose" h
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Patrick wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:49 PM, Stefan Schulte wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 03:48:16PM -0800, Nigel Kersten wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Dan Bode wrote:
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Pittman
wrote:
>
>
Raised bug #5983 about those points.
On Jan 24, 11:43 am, Nicolas Aizier
wrote:
> I made some more research on this problem and found another one. I
> think it's linked.
>
> The 30th day of puppet (the one the more on the left side in puppet-
> dashboard) is slowly decrasing in term of successful
--manual
?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit t
Patrick writes:
> I know some people use it whenever they want "--verbose --no-daemonize
> --onetime".
This is common use of the puppet agent at my site.
--
Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
Oooo, shiny!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Jesse Reynolds writes:
> --manual
Looks better than --interactive, since I don't assume it will start
asking me questions. :)
--
Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
Oooo, shiny!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" gr
36 matches
Mail list logo
