Are tags possible when using LDAP for external node info? If so how? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Aug 18, 2008, at 11:36 AM, Larry Ludwig wrote:> Are tags possible when using LDAP for external node info? If so how?Can you provide some more info? Tags are generally automatic, so yeah, they''re both possible and likely. Dunno what you want to do with them, though. -- The great tragedy of Science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact. --Thomas H. Huxley --------------------------------------------------------------------- Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
like this using the tag command:
node test {
tag(iptables-stop)
include base
}
I assume variables are really the only/better way? the ''base''
class
has all sorts of other functions. By default starts up iptables.
There are some customer cases (ack) that they want iptables disabled
(an if statement is in the base class)
From what I remember you (luke) recommend not using variables as much
as possible and should be using tags? When using LDAP, external
nodes, it appears I really can''t do what I''m trying to do.
On Aug 18, 12:37 pm, Luke Kanies <l...@madstop.com>
wrote:> On Aug 18, 2008, at 11:36 AM, Larry Ludwig wrote:
>
> > Are tags possible when using LDAP for external node info? If so how?
>
> Can you provide some more info?
>
> Tags are generally automatic, so yeah, they''re both possible and
> likely. Dunno what you want to do with them, though.
>
> --
> The great tragedy of Science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by
> an ugly fact. --Thomas H. Huxley
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Luke Kanies |http://reductivelabs.com|http://madstop.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Aug 18, 2008, at 12:56 PM, Larry Ludwig wrote:> like this using the tag command: > > node test { > tag(iptables-stop) > include base > } > > I assume variables are really the only/better way? the ''base'' class > has all sorts of other functions. By default starts up iptables. > There are some customer cases (ack) that they want iptables disabled > (an if statement is in the base class)Puppet will automatically tag the node with any classes returned by the external node tool but that do not exist. So for this, just specify that as a class. Ironically, there was just a bug filed about the fact that these not- found classes don''t raise an exception. It *might* be that these node classes aren''t actually exposed in the language, since they might be in a different tag pool; I don''t remember.> From what I remember you (luke) recommend not using variables as much > as possible and should be using tags? When using LDAP, external > nodes, it appears I really can''t do what I''m trying to do.Hmm, I don''t remember recommending that, but it wouldn''t be all that surprising. I don''t appear to feel that way right now, though. :) -- If there is anything the nonconformist hates worse than a conformist, it''s another nonconformist who doesn''t conform to the prevailing standard of nonconformity. --Bill Vaughan --------------------------------------------------------------------- Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> Hmm, I don''t remember recommending that, but it wouldn''t be all that > surprising. I don''t appear to feel that way right now, though. :)OK :-) Then I''ll stick to vars to define optional items or items that need specific setup ie: $config_mysql=5 What would be nice is a class has required/optional parameters in order to work. That way it can fail a compile time. I know this makes classes more like a define. Problem is defines can''t be using via LDAP/external nodes. It would be nice if defines were available. The web based gui we are working on for now will tie variables with specific classes. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Larry Ludwig wrote:> > >> Hmm, I don''t remember recommending that, but it wouldn''t be all that >> surprising. I don''t appear to feel that way right now, though. :) > > OK :-) > > Then I''ll stick to vars to define optional items or items that need > specific setup ie: > > $config_mysql=5 > > What would be nice is a class has required/optional parameters in > order to work. That way it can fail a compile time. I know this > makes classes more like a define. > > Problem is defines can''t be using via LDAP/external nodes. It would > be nice if defines were available. The web based gui we are working > on for now will tie variables with specific classes.Yeah, it''s been my plan for a while to add the ability to specify that a given class supports or requires parameters. They''re still unlike defines in that they''re singletons. If anyone else is interested in becoming a parser guru... -- The brain is a wonderful organ. It starts working the moment you get up in the morning and does not stop until you get into the office. --Robert Frost --------------------------------------------------------------------- Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I never took the compiler elective in CompSci :-) but something I have future time will look into. -L On Aug 18, 4:22 pm, Luke Kanies <l...@madstop.com> wrote:> On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Larry Ludwig wrote: > > > > > > >> Hmm, I don''t remember recommending that, but it wouldn''t be all that > >> surprising. I don''t appear to feel that way right now, though. :) > > > OK :-) > > > Then I''ll stick to vars to define optional items or items that need > > specific setup ie: > > > $config_mysql=5 > > > What would be nice is a class has required/optional parameters in > > order to work. That way it can fail a compile time. I know this > > makes classes more like a define. > > > Problem is defines can''t be using via LDAP/external nodes. It would > > be nice if defines were available. The web based gui we are working > > on for now will tie variables with specific classes. > > Yeah, it''s been my plan for a while to add the ability to specify that > a given class supports or requires parameters. They''re still unlike > defines in that they''re singletons. > > If anyone else is interested in becoming a parser guru... > > -- > The brain is a wonderful organ. It starts working the moment you get > up in the morning and does not stop until you get into the office. > --Robert Frost > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Luke Kanies |http://reductivelabs.com|http://madstop.com--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---