Please step into my office, and I''ll remove you :-)
Or look at the mail headers and take appropriate action:
List-Unsubscribe:
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
<mailto:puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Regards,
Martijn.
On 25-01-11 07:48, Ralph.Grothe@itdz-berlin.de wrote:>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* puppet-users@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of
> *puppet-users+noreply@googlegroups.com
> *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2011 1:00 PM
> *To:* Abridged Recipients
> *Subject:* [Puppet Users] Abridged summary of
> puppet-users@googlegroups.com - 45 Messages in 9 Topics
>
> Today''s Topic Summary
>
> Group: http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/topics
>
> * scheduler problem? <#group_thread_0> [1 Update]
> * Do we need a new name for "--test"?
<#group_thread_1> [34 Updates]
> * mcollective for rhel 4 <#group_thread_2> [2 Updates]
> * Puppet dashboard don''t show current day
<#group_thread_3> [2
> Updates]
> * Behavior of local modules and their included facts
> <#group_thread_4> [1 Update]
> * problems with dependencies <#group_thread_5> [2 Updates]
> * high 500 error rate on file metadata operations
> <#group_thread_6> [1 Update]
> * PSA: Please use <pre> tags when reporting bugs.
> <#group_thread_7> [1 Update]
> * another 2.6 question... stages <#group_thread_8> [1 Update]
>
> Topic: scheduler problem?
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/e00eda15de69b533>
>
> Antony Mayi <antonymayi@yahoo.com> Jan 24 11:29AM ^
<#digest_top>
>
> Hi Nan,
>
> thanks. I have removed the schedule (re)definition but it does
> still the same -
> the tidy is called on every run (every 30 minutes). the
> state.yaml after a
> typical run has following more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/7199a3f934647c02>
>
> Topic: Do we need a new name for "--test"?
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/fbe7bcfe04b5f657>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 01:33PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>
> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>
> What would be a better name for "--test"?
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/d3dd3cbe311368e8>
>
> Adam Nielsen <a.nielsen@shikadi.net> Jan 24 07:50AM +1000 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> > 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4f4c6c8b58c491c2>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 02:15PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
>
> >> 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.
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/69a330193ef7d96d>
>
> Denmat <tu2bgone@gmail.com> Jan 24 09:35AM +1100 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> 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.
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/1313878342cdbaa7>
>
> Patrick <kc7zzv@gmail.com> Jan 23 02:44PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 1:50 PM, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>
>
> >> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/32700f78acf03e7>
>
> Daniel Pittman <daniel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 03:35PM -0800
^
> <#digest_top>
>
> 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
>
> >>> What would be a better more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/ba3086cb22134102>
>
> Dan Bode <dan@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 03:38PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
>
> > >>> https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>
> > >>> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>
> > >>> What would be a better name for
"--test"?
>
> maybe we could keep --test and add more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/76601ceef12222cd>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 03:48PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
>
> >> >>> This does seem to confuse a fair few new
users.
>
> >> >>> What would be a better name for
"--test"?
>
> > maybe we could keep --test and add --noop to the list of
> options in sets.
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/244d60976141b243>
>
> James Louis <jglouisjr@gmail.com> Jan 23 06:02PM -0600 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> and what is the current functionality for the --test option?
>
>
> --
> “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the
> things that you
> didn’t do than by the ones you did do. more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/e8eae94aa11e26d8>
>
> Patrick <kc7zzv@gmail.com> Jan 23 04:42PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4b97b5f36bd44de0>
>
> James Louis <jglouisjr@gmail.com> Jan 23 06:47PM -0600 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/908f0f7f43eb6443>
>
> Stefan Schulte <stefan.schulte@taunusstein.net> Jan 24
01:49AM
> +0100 ^ <#digest_top>
>
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 03:48:16PM -0800, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> > some sympathy for that position, but before we can get
there,
> we need
> > to have a name for the existing functionality that I
don''t
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/ff53e41916079ae3>
>
> Patrick <kc7zzv@gmail.com> Jan 23 04:50PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/716d2ac4f39c3907>
>
> James Louis <jglouisjr@gmail.com> Jan 23 06:53PM -0600 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> exactly. to what purpose?
>
>
> --
> “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the
> things that you
> didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the
> bowlines. Sail away more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/2db6dda09757cd4f>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 05:22PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> > 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/f353c7fb94ce4412>
>
> James Louis <jglouisjr@gmail.com> Jan 23 07:34PM -0600 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/6b548d99953bbd1f>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 05:51PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> > 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/3994d632374b04de>
>
> eshamow <eric.shamow@gmail.com> Jan 23 05:58PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/ae6e3bb895a0258c>
>
> James Louis <jglouisjr@gmail.com> Jan 23 08:16PM -0600 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> 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?
>
>
> --
> “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/80c79a8f81fa29d>
>
> Patrick <kc7zzv@gmail.com> Jan 23 07:23PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/d1b35186370e1f99>
>
> Patrick <kc7zzv@gmail.com> Jan 23 07:26PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:53 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/6f0ed82ca21de926>
>
> Patrick <kc7zzv@gmail.com> Jan 23 07:27PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 5:58 PM, eshamow wrote:
>
>
> > It might be wise to consider combining a bunch of similar
options
> > (verbose, test, debug, etc) into a "verbose" with
levels of
> output -- more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/b53be26b1d611377>
>
> Patrick <kc7zzv@gmail.com> Jan 23 07:30PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:49 PM, Stefan Schulte wrote:
>
> > (maybe it does so already). We could then say --test
--no-noop
> to match
> > current behaviour.
>
> > -Stefan
>
>
> I think this is a really bad more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c40dcb1e2545c4dc>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 07:38PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
>
> >> -Stefan
>
> > I think this is a really bad idea because I really think
> Puppet has broken a lot of things recently and people use --test
> in automatic scripts.
>
> > This is really almost always an more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/8ddaf1872f18c305>
>
> Jesse Reynolds <jessedreynolds@gmail.com> Jan 23 10:27PM
-0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> --manual
>
> ?
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c33ee19af8a85b7a>
>
> Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <ssm@fnord.no> Jan 24 07:56AM +0100
^
> <#digest_top>
>
>
> > 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
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/22903c06821f6248>
>
> Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <ssm@fnord.no> Jan 24 08:36AM +0100
^
> <#digest_top>
>
>
> > --manual
>
> Looks better than --interactive, since I don''t assume it
will start
> asking me questions. :)
>
> --
> Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
> Oooo, shiny!
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/5485e90e6f2b4296>
>
> Daniel Pittman <daniel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 24 12:13AM -0800
^
> <#digest_top>
>
>
> >> --manual
>
> > Looks better than --interactive, since I don''t
assume it will
> start
> > asking me questions. :)
>
> I like it too.
> Daniel
> --
> ⎋ Puppet Labs Developer – more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/f3c2d0ba394e2fff>
>
> DEGREMONT Aurelien <aurelien.degremont@cea.fr> Jan 24
09:27AM
> +0100 ^ <#digest_top>
>
> Nigel Kersten a écrit :
> > 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 discussion.
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/559a57524f22842b>
>
> "Carles Amigó" <carles.amigo@softonic.com> Jan 24
11:38AM +0100
> ^ <#digest_top>
>
> +1
>
> El 24/01/2011 9:13, Daniel Pittman escribió:
> >> asking me questions. :)
>
> > I like it too.
> > Daniel
>
> --
> Carles Amigó
> Linux System Administrator
> carles.amigo@softonic.com
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4a0be4f51eb4066e>
>
> Adam Nielsen <a.nielsen@shikadi.net> Jan 24 09:00PM +1000 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> > --verbose
> > --no-usecacheonfailure
>
> > and I think I''m missing some newer additions too.
>
> Hmm that''s true, and it is similar to --onetime. How
about
> --explain? The
> end result is that you get more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/192cc6d6dafb738>
>
> Jonathan Gazeley <jonathan.gazeley@bristol.ac.uk> Jan 24
11:01AM
> ^ <#digest_top>
>
> On 24/01/11 11:00, Adam Nielsen wrote:
> > added to do the same with no-op as well.
>
> > Cheers,
> > Adam.
>
> How about simply --once ? Nice and quick to type.
>
> Jonathan
>
> -- more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/19f7280b37790b73>
>
> Adam Nielsen <a.nielsen@shikadi.net> Jan 24 09:11PM +1000 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
>
> >> Hmm that''s true, and it is similar to
--onetime. How about
> --explain?
> >> The end result is that you get a detailed explanation of
what
> is happening.
>
> > How about simply --once ? Nice and quick more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c19d135db7d8c956>
>
> Thorsten Biel <Thorsten.Biel@porsche.de> Jan 24 12:22PM
+0100 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> On Jan 24, 2011, at 12:00, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>
>
> >> and I think I''m missing some newer additions
too.
>
> > Hmm that''s true, and it is similar to --onetime.
How about
> --explain? The end result is more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/dac514ef05060f52>
>
> Topic: mcollective for rhel 4
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/4c6bbbe891d71082>
>
> eshamow <eric.shamow@gmail.com> Jan 23 05:23PM -0800 ^
<#digest_top>
>
> The Fedora 13 SRPMs backport pretty easily, and you get the
> advantage
> of Ruby 1.8.6.
>
> -Eric
>
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/e523b679921a0f35>
>
> Ohad Levy <ohadlevy@gmail.com> Jan 24 11:08AM +0200 ^
<#digest_top>
>
>
> > The Fedora 13 SRPMs backport pretty easily, and you get the
> advantage
> > of Ruby 1.8.6.
>
> > -Eric
>
> Sure, but for those who don''t want to replace/break the
> internals of ruby on
> rhel4... :)
>
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/540eca7921dacb0f>
>
> Topic: Puppet dashboard don''t show current day
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/6d9c8dda8feda0ff>
>
> Nicolas Aizier <nicolas.aizier@googlemail.com> Jan 23
05:43PM
> -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/20844acbfb20284e>
>
> Nicolas Aizier <nicolas.aizier@googlemail.com> Jan 23
09:48PM
> -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>
> Raised bug #5983 about those points.
>
> On Jan 24, 11:43 am, Nicolas Aizier
<nicolas.aiz...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/2de3d92e0352da4c>
>
> Topic: Behavior of local modules and their included facts
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/de0c9b342bd7007>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 02:18PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Nick Fagerlund
> > issues/4180). This was never fixed in 0.25.x, right? Should
we
> re-open
> > or file a new ticket?
>
> > (Also, should this bug be mentioned in the more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c22a49d9fed12797>
>
> Topic: problems with dependencies
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/da35198378c28b21>
>
> "russell.fulton" <russell.fulton@gmail.com> Jan
23 01:17PM -0800
> ^ <#digest_top>
>
> 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.
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/641f0980d2171af>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 02:17PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 1:17 PM, russell.fulton
> > docs for exec.
>
> > is this a doc bug or is it a generic option available with
all
> > resources?
>
> It''s the latter Russell. You can find them all in
more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4b7ca4d915cfd26c>
>
> Topic: high 500 error rate on file metadata operations
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/8f78a3f1d71afa2>
>
> Daniel Pittman <daniel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 01:59PM -0800
^
> <#digest_top>
>
> > logging of puppet errors. I''ve done some analysis
of the logs
> that I
> > have and found that the majority of the 500s (~83%) received
> by our
> > Ubuntu clients are on file metadata operations:
> more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/3554c5d0fc1cddf9>
>
> Topic: PSA: Please use <pre> tags when reporting bugs.
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/5e4c1ffd8b340533>
>
> Nigel Kersten <nigel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 01:48PM -0800 ^
> <#digest_top>
>
> 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 more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/acc9991164c5415e>
>
> Topic: another 2.6 question... stages
> <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/2aa399bda4e013fb>
>
> Daniel Pittman <daniel@puppetlabs.com> Jan 23 09:49AM -0800
^
> <#digest_top>
>
> > }
>
> > Is it safe to assume that "foo" will always be
managed during
> the preamble
> > stage regardless of other definitions?
>
> Puppet will treat a dependency that would violate that
> expectation as more...
>
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4c4b9441463c6826>
>
> --
> 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.
>
> --
> 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.
--
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.