Re: General questions and problems with exec...

Juri Rischel Jensen
Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:43:09 -0000

Hi Luke

On Oct 10, 2006, at 17:21, Luke Kanies wrote:
> Juri Rischel Jensen wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 2006, at 22:45, Luke Kanies wrote:
>>
>>> Juri Rischel Jensen wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>> During installs, just start puppetd with --ignoreschedules.  This
>>> will
>>> cause it to, well, ignore schedules.  In other words, all objects
>>> will
>>> run, whether they match their schedule or not.
>>
>> This got me thinking: What about general security updates, eg. for
>> all the libraries, dependency programs etc? Can puppet handle them as
>> well...? Or do I have to make an exec statement of some sort to
>> handle that...?
>
> It mostly just depends on how you want to manage them.  I''d expect
> you''ll want to just do an apt-get upgrade periodically, in which
> case it
> makes more sense to just have an exec statement handle that.  If you
> want to specifically manage the state of a given package, or of all
> packages, then you use Puppet''s support for packages.

Ok. I like it that way. Is there any way to set a default on a type,
eg. define a general schedule for packages, without specifying
"schedule => maintance" on all package statements, or subclassing
like "class remotefile { file {..." etc. ??

>> One more question that comes to mind: Does puppet run "apt-get
>> update" before every run with "package" statements...?
>
> No -- it''s up to you to determine how often you want to update.

Ok.

>> Wauv, that really cut down on the size of that file! Just what I
>> want: To be able to type less to do more... ;-) Thanks!
>
> Glad to help.
>
>> Actually the line should read "@cat
/etc/shorewall/rulefiles/*.rules
>>> rules" as I suspected that exact variable to be causing the
>> problem; but it weren''t. It still doesn''t work.
>
> Ok.  Have you tried running the exec with ''logoutput =>
true'' set?
> That should at least tell you what make is saying.  Are you getting a
> failure from make?

Yes. I hadn''t specified /bin in the path, and make couldn''t
find
ls... doh! ;-)

It''s now fixed. It''s a cool feature that you can turn on debug
for a
specific part of the code...