Puppet users - May 2009 - Cant get puppet to remove rpm's with circular dependencies

Hi Guys,

I''m trying to use puppet to remove some software on all our machines.
The two rpm''s I''m trying to remove are dependent on each
other, that is rpm A requires rpm B and rpm B requires rpm A.

The packages installed fine with puppet via yum (I just asked to install rpm A).
Unfortunately puppet is calling "rpm -e", not "yum remove"
to remove packages so just asking to remove rpm A causes a dependency error. I
tried using "provider => yum" in the package definition but this
was ignored.

To get round this I specified both packages: "package { [rpmA,rpmB]: ensure
=> absent }". Unfortunately this doesn''t work either. It
appears puppet is running:

for package in packages:
        rpm -e package

As opposed to:

rpm -e " ".join(packages)

(no prizes for guessing what language I am most familiar with :)

Consequently I am unable to use puppet to remove this package. I cant easily
resort to an exec statement as I am doing the following:

class software{
        package{ [a,b]: ensure => present }
}

class software::uninstall{
        package{ [a,b]: ensure => absent }
}

As this allows me per-node control over the removal.

I''m using puppet 0.24.8 on rhel5.3.

Can I get round this, or should I file a bug report?

-ross




Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon, OX14 3YP, United
Kingdom.
Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

RPM circular dependencies have nothing to do with puppet.
I would rebuild the packages and fix the dependency issue, then the  
problem would go away.

If you are not comfortable with rebuilding the packages then my  
suggestion would be use an exec for this specific case doing a rpm -e  
--allmatches --nodeps --force package1 package2

When you pass the package type an array of names, it iterates over  
them instead of using the array values  like a glob.

Again, not a puppet issue but a circular dependency issue.
-Jason


On May 1, 2009, at 8:22 AM, Ross McKerchar wrote:
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I''m trying to use puppet to remove some software on all our  
> machines. The two rpm''s I''m trying to remove are
dependent on each
> other, that is rpm A requires rpm B and rpm B requires rpm A.
>
> The packages installed fine with puppet via yum (I just asked to  
> install rpm A). Unfortunately puppet is calling "rpm -e", not
"yum
> remove" to remove packages so just asking to remove rpm A causes a  
> dependency error. I tried using "provider => yum" in the
package
> definition but this was ignored.
>
> To get round this I specified both packages: "package { [rpmA,rpmB]:  
> ensure => absent }". Unfortunately this doesn''t work
either. It
> appears puppet is running:
>
> for package in packages:
>        rpm -e package
>
> As opposed to:
>
> rpm -e " ".join(packages)
>
> (no prizes for guessing what language I am most familiar with :)
>
> Consequently I am unable to use puppet to remove this package. I  
> cant easily resort to an exec statement as I am doing the following:
>
> class software{
>        package{ [a,b]: ensure => present }
> }
>
> class software::uninstall{
>        package{ [a,b]: ensure => absent }
> }
>
> As this allows me per-node control over the removal.
>
> I''m using puppet 0.24.8 on rhel5.3.
>
> Can I get round this, or should I file a bug report?
>
> -ross
>
>
>
>
> Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon, OX14 3YP,  
> United Kingdom.
> Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20.
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 see the same dependency problem with ypbind and yp-tools that come  
with Fedora/RHEL/CentOS.

Changing to using an exec seems broken.  It prevents you from using  
the builtin provider that puppet supplies.

- JimP

On May 1, 2009, at 11:36 AM, Jason Rojas wrote:
>
> RPM circular dependencies have nothing to do with puppet.
> I would rebuild the packages and fix the dependency issue, then the
> problem would go away.
>
> If you are not comfortable with rebuilding the packages then my
> suggestion would be use an exec for this specific case doing a rpm -e
> --allmatches --nodeps --force package1 package2
>
> When you pass the package type an array of names, it iterates over
> them instead of using the array values  like a glob.
>
> Again, not a puppet issue but a circular dependency issue.
> -Jason
>
>
> On May 1, 2009, at 8:22 AM, Ross McKerchar wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I''m trying to use puppet to remove some software on all our
>> machines. The two rpm''s I''m trying to remove are
dependent on each
>> other, that is rpm A requires rpm B and rpm B requires rpm A.
>>
>> The packages installed fine with puppet via yum (I just asked to
>> install rpm A). Unfortunately puppet is calling "rpm -e", not
"yum
>> remove" to remove packages so just asking to remove rpm A causes a
>> dependency error. I tried using "provider => yum" in the
package
>> definition but this was ignored.
>>
>> To get round this I specified both packages: "package {
[rpmA,rpmB]:
>> ensure => absent }". Unfortunately this doesn''t work
either. It
>> appears puppet is running:
>>
>> for package in packages:
>>        rpm -e package
>>
>> As opposed to:
>>
>> rpm -e " ".join(packages)
>>
>> (no prizes for guessing what language I am most familiar with :)
>>
>> Consequently I am unable to use puppet to remove this package. I
>> cant easily resort to an exec statement as I am doing the following:
>>
>> class software{
>>        package{ [a,b]: ensure => present }
>> }
>>
>> class software::uninstall{
>>        package{ [a,b]: ensure => absent }
>> }
>>
>> As this allows me per-node control over the removal.
>>
>> I''m using puppet 0.24.8 on rhel5.3.
>>
>> Can I get round this, or should I file a bug report?
>>
>> -ross
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon, OX14 3YP,
>> United Kingdom.
>> Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20.
>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> 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
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
--- @(#) $Id: dot.signature,v 1.15 2007/12/27 15:06:13 pirzyk Exp $
     __o  jim@pirzyk.org -------------------------------------------
  _''\<,_
(*)/ (*) I''d rather be out biking.



--- @(#) $Id: dot.signature,v 1.15 2007/12/27 15:06:13 pirzyk Exp $
     __o  jim@pirzyk.org -------------------------------------------
  _''\<,_
(*)/ (*) I''d rather be out biking.

I''m not sure broken is the right word.  The Package type needs a way to
supply options to the underlying provider.

I ran into a similar issue with yum when I needed to install an RPM from 
a particular repo (yum --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rpmforge)

Or install a package from a repo that is disabled by default (yum 
--enablrerepo=rpmforge)
I ended up reluctantly creating custom Exec''s for both scenarios.

There is a feature request ticket open for the issue I mentioned

http://projects.reductivelabs.com/issues/915


-Brandon

Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> I see the same dependency problem with ypbind and yp-tools that come 
> with Fedora/RHEL/CentOS.
> 
> Changing to using an exec seems broken.  It prevents you from using the 
> builtin provider that puppet supplies.
> 
> - JimP
> 
> On May 1, 2009, at 11:36 AM, Jason Rojas wrote:
> 
>>
>> RPM circular dependencies have nothing to do with puppet.
>> I would rebuild the packages and fix the dependency issue, then the
>> problem would go away.
>>
>> If you are not comfortable with rebuilding the packages then my
>> suggestion would be use an exec for this specific case doing a rpm -e
>> --allmatches --nodeps --force package1 package2
>>
>> When you pass the package type an array of names, it iterates over
>> them instead of using the array values  like a glob.
>>
>> Again, not a puppet issue but a circular dependency issue.
>> -Jason
>>
>>
>> On May 1, 2009, at 8:22 AM, Ross McKerchar wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Guys,
>>>
>>> I''m trying to use puppet to remove some software on all
our
>>> machines. The two rpm''s I''m trying to remove are
dependent on each
>>> other, that is rpm A requires rpm B and rpm B requires rpm A.
>>>
>>> The packages installed fine with puppet via yum (I just asked to
>>> install rpm A). Unfortunately puppet is calling "rpm -e",
not "yum
>>> remove" to remove packages so just asking to remove rpm A
causes a
>>> dependency error. I tried using "provider => yum" in
the package
>>> definition but this was ignored.
>>>
>>> To get round this I specified both packages: "package {
[rpmA,rpmB]:
>>> ensure => absent }". Unfortunately this doesn''t
work either. It
>>> appears puppet is running:
>>>
>>> for package in packages:
>>>        rpm -e package
>>>
>>> As opposed to:
>>>
>>> rpm -e " ".join(packages)
>>>
>>> (no prizes for guessing what language I am most familiar with :)
>>>
>>> Consequently I am unable to use puppet to remove this package. I
>>> cant easily resort to an exec statement as I am doing the
following:
>>>
>>> class software{
>>>        package{ [a,b]: ensure => present }
>>> }
>>>
>>> class software::uninstall{
>>>        package{ [a,b]: ensure => absent }
>>> }
>>>
>>> As this allows me per-node control over the removal.
>>>
>>> I''m using puppet 0.24.8 on rhel5.3.
>>>
>>> Can I get round this, or should I file a bug report?
>>>
>>> -ross
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon, OX14
3YP,
>>> United Kingdom.
>>> Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20.
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> > 
> --- @(#) $Id: dot.signature,v 1.15 2007/12/27 15:06:13 pirzyk Exp $
>     __o  jim@pirzyk.org -------------------------------------------
>  _''\<,_
> (*)/ (*) I''d rather be out biking.
> 
> 
> 
> --- @(#) $Id: dot.signature,v 1.15 2007/12/27 15:06:13 pirzyk Exp $
>     __o  jim@pirzyk.org -------------------------------------------
>  _''\<,_
> (*)/ (*) I''d rather be out biking.
> 
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---