Tim Harper
2009-Mar-26 21:43 UTC
[Puppet Users] Is there a work around to sandbox the fileserver mounts?
... premature send ... When I use this environment (via puppetd --test --environment tim), the unique manifest path takes on effect, however, the fileserverconfig does not, as is evident by it not throwing an error from a completely invalid file contents (picture typing the file by pounding on the keyboard) (i first tried corrupting the paths, that didn''t do anything either) Looking at the wiki (just barely noticed it, don''t know why I didn''t realize it before), I understand why: =======Only certain parameters make sense to be configured per-environment, and all of those parameters revolve around specifying what files to use to compile a client''s configuration. Those parameters are: * modulepath: Where to look for modules. It''s best to have a standard module directory that all environments share and then a per-environment directory where custom modules can be stored. * templatedir: Where to look for templates. The modulepath should be preferred to this setting, but it allows you to have different versions of a given template in each environment. * manifest: Which file to use as the main entry point for the configuration. The Puppet parser looks for other files to compile in the same directory as this manifest, so this parameter also determines where other per-environment Puppet manifests should be stored. With a separate module path, it should be easy to use the same simple manifest in all environments. === to me it makes sense to configure the files per-environment. We store a variety of config files that we distribute as is, like apache vhost files and generic config files. Does anyone know of if there is a work around to sandbox the fileserver mounts? Thanks, Tim --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Nigel Kersten
2009-Mar-26 23:00 UTC
[Puppet Users] Re: Is there a work around to sandbox the fileserver mounts?
Honestly, you just want to put everything in modules if you''re using environments, and not use fileserver mounts outside of modules. On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Tim Harper <timcharper@gmail.com> wrote:> ... premature send ... > When I use this environment (via puppetd --test --environment tim), the > unique manifest path takes on effect, however, the fileserverconfig does > not, as is evident by it not throwing an error from a completely invalid > file contents (picture typing the file by pounding on the keyboard) (i first > tried corrupting the paths, that didn''t do anything either) > Looking at the wiki (just barely noticed it, don''t know why I didn''t realize > it before), I understand why: > =======> Only certain parameters make sense to be configured per-environment, and all > of those parameters revolve around specifying what files to use to compile a > client''s configuration. Those parameters are: > * modulepath: Where to look for modules. It''s best to have a standard > module directory that all environments share and then a per-environment > directory where custom modules can be stored. > * templatedir: Where to look for templates. The modulepath should be > preferred to this setting, but it allows you to have different versions of a > given template in each environment. > * manifest: Which file to use as the main entry point for the > configuration. The Puppet parser looks for other files to compile in the > same directory as this manifest, so this parameter also determines where > other per-environment Puppet manifests should be stored. With a separate > module path, it should be easy to use the same simple manifest in all > environments. > ===> to me it makes sense to configure the files per-environment. We store a > variety of config files that we distribute as is, like apache vhost files > and generic config files. Does anyone know of if there is a work around to > sandbox the fileserver mounts? > Thanks, > Tim > > >-- Nigel Kersten nigelk@google.com System Administrator Google, Inc. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Tim Harper
2009-Mar-26 23:47 UTC
[Puppet Users] Re: Is there a work around to sandbox the fileserver mounts?
Thank you for the quick tip :) Can you access files in modules from normal non-module manifests? (IE - can I start off by moving all of my file mounts in to a module) ? On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Nigel Kersten <nigelk@google.com> wrote:> > Honestly, you just want to put everything in modules if you''re using > environments, and not use fileserver mounts outside of modules. > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Tim Harper <timcharper@gmail.com> wrote: > > ... premature send ... > > When I use this environment (via puppetd --test --environment tim), the > > unique manifest path takes on effect, however, the fileserverconfig does > > not, as is evident by it not throwing an error from a completely invalid > > file contents (picture typing the file by pounding on the keyboard) (i > first > > tried corrupting the paths, that didn''t do anything either) > > Looking at the wiki (just barely noticed it, don''t know why I didn''t > realize > > it before), I understand why: > > =======> > Only certain parameters make sense to be configured per-environment, and > all > > of those parameters revolve around specifying what files to use to > compile a > > client''s configuration. Those parameters are: > > * modulepath: Where to look for modules. It''s best to have a standard > > module directory that all environments share and then a per-environment > > directory where custom modules can be stored. > > * templatedir: Where to look for templates. The modulepath should be > > preferred to this setting, but it allows you to have different versions > of a > > given template in each environment. > > * manifest: Which file to use as the main entry point for the > > configuration. The Puppet parser looks for other files to compile in the > > same directory as this manifest, so this parameter also determines where > > other per-environment Puppet manifests should be stored. With a separate > > module path, it should be easy to use the same simple manifest in all > > environments. > > ===> > to me it makes sense to configure the files per-environment. We store a > > variety of config files that we distribute as is, like apache vhost files > > and generic config files. Does anyone know of if there is a work around > to > > sandbox the fileserver mounts? > > Thanks, > > Tim > > > > > > > > > -- > Nigel Kersten > nigelk@google.com > System Administrator > Google, Inc. > > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Tim Harper
2009-Mar-26 23:56 UTC
[Puppet Users] Re: Is there a work around to sandbox the fileserver mounts?
You know what, I went ahead and tried it, and it worked great. Thanks! Tim On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Tim Harper <timcharper@gmail.com> wrote:> Thank you for the quick tip :) > Can you access files in modules from normal non-module manifests? (IE - > can I start off by moving all of my file mounts in to a module) ? > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Nigel Kersten <nigelk@google.com> wrote: > >> >> Honestly, you just want to put everything in modules if you''re using >> environments, and not use fileserver mounts outside of modules. >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Tim Harper <timcharper@gmail.com> wrote: >> > ... premature send ... >> > When I use this environment (via puppetd --test --environment tim), the >> > unique manifest path takes on effect, however, the fileserverconfig does >> > not, as is evident by it not throwing an error from a completely invalid >> > file contents (picture typing the file by pounding on the keyboard) (i >> first >> > tried corrupting the paths, that didn''t do anything either) >> > Looking at the wiki (just barely noticed it, don''t know why I didn''t >> realize >> > it before), I understand why: >> > =======>> > Only certain parameters make sense to be configured per-environment, and >> all >> > of those parameters revolve around specifying what files to use to >> compile a >> > client''s configuration. Those parameters are: >> > * modulepath: Where to look for modules. It''s best to have a >> standard >> > module directory that all environments share and then a per-environment >> > directory where custom modules can be stored. >> > * templatedir: Where to look for templates. The modulepath should be >> > preferred to this setting, but it allows you to have different versions >> of a >> > given template in each environment. >> > * manifest: Which file to use as the main entry point for the >> > configuration. The Puppet parser looks for other files to compile in the >> > same directory as this manifest, so this parameter also determines where >> > other per-environment Puppet manifests should be stored. With a separate >> > module path, it should be easy to use the same simple manifest in all >> > environments. >> > ===>> > to me it makes sense to configure the files per-environment. We store a >> > variety of config files that we distribute as is, like apache vhost >> files >> > and generic config files. Does anyone know of if there is a work around >> to >> > sandbox the fileserver mounts? >> > Thanks, >> > Tim >> > > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Nigel Kersten >> nigelk@google.com >> System Administrator >> Google, Inc. >> >> >> >> >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Thomas Bellman
2009-Mar-27 10:08 UTC
[Puppet Users] Re: Is there a work around to sandbox the fileserver mounts?
Nigel Kersten wrote:> Honestly, you just want to put everything in modules if you''re using > environments, and not use fileserver mounts outside of modules.But not those that you use for plugins (custom facts and custom types). You will only get confused if you try to put them into environments. I believe you''ll be able to have environment-specific custom facts in 0.25, but not environment-specific custom types or functions. /Bellman --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---