Puppet users - Mar 2012 - How to handle multiple definitions of the same package in multiple included modules?

How to handle this scenario?

Assume that all three apps are defined in three separate modules.  All 
three modules are mutually exclusive with the exception that they require 
the same packageA to be installed.

Pseudocode:

class module1::app1 {
  package {
    ''packageA'':
      ;
  }
}

class module2::app2 {
  package {
    ''packageA'':
      ;
  }
}

class module3::app3 {
  package {
    ''packageA'':
      ;
  }
}

-- site.pp

node ''mynode.example.com'' {
  include module1::app1
  include module2::app2
  include module3::app3
}

This will give me an error that packageA is already defined in another 
file.  I *know* I''m missing something simple, but what is it?  How can
I
avoid this situation of the duplicate package definitions while ensuring 
the resource Package[''packageA''] is created?

I tried the following but I guess I''m not understanding the defined() 
function properly:

class module1::app1 {
  if ! defined(Package[''packageA'']) {
    package {
      ''packageA'':
        ;
    }
  }
}

Forgive me if this is an oft asked question.  I couldn''t figure out the
search term that made sense that would match this scenario.  TIA

Mike.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/Q5kdE6TkzGYJ.
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 can put the package resource in a single class, and include this class
in app[1-3],  alternatively, try virtual resources, see:
http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/virtual_resources.html

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 9:15 AM, EmmEff <mikef17@gmail.com> wrote:
> How to handle this scenario?
>
> Assume that all three apps are defined in three separate modules.  All
> three modules are mutually exclusive with the exception that they require
> the same packageA to be installed.
>
> Pseudocode:
>
> class module1::app1 {
>   package {
>     ''packageA'':
>       ;
>   }
> }
>
> class module2::app2 {
>   package {
>     ''packageA'':
>       ;
>   }
> }
>
> class module3::app3 {
>   package {
>     ''packageA'':
>       ;
>   }
> }
>
> -- site.pp
>
> node ''mynode.example.com'' {
>   include module1::app1
>   include module2::app2
>   include module3::app3
> }
>
> This will give me an error that packageA is already defined in another
> file.  I *know* I''m missing something simple, but what is it?  How
can I
> avoid this situation of the duplicate package definitions while ensuring
> the resource Package[''packageA''] is created?
>
> I tried the following but I guess I''m not understanding the
defined()
> function properly:
>
> class module1::app1 {
>   if ! defined(Package[''packageA'']) {
>     package {
>       ''packageA'':
>         ;
>     }
>   }
> }
>
> Forgive me if this is an oft asked question.  I couldn''t figure
out the
> search term that made sense that would match this scenario.  TIA
>
> Mike.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Users" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/Q5kdE6TkzGYJ.
> 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 need virtual resources:


1.       Define package A in a virtual way:



    @package {

        "A" :

            ensure => ''present'',

    }



2.       Then  realize it wherever needed:

class module2::app2 {

            realize(Package["A"])

            # your stuff here...
}


Cheers,
Bernd

Von: puppet-users@googlegroups.com [mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com] Im
Auftrag von EmmEff
Gesendet: Montag, 19. März 2012 02:15
An: puppet-users@googlegroups.com
Betreff: [Puppet Users] How to handle multiple definitions of the same package
in multiple included modules?

How to handle this scenario?

Assume that all three apps are defined in three separate modules.  All three
modules are mutually exclusive with the exception that they require the same
packageA to be installed.

Pseudocode:

class module1::app1 {
  package {
    ''packageA'':
      ;
  }
}

class module2::app2 {
  package {
    ''packageA'':
      ;
  }
}

class module3::app3 {
  package {
    ''packageA'':
      ;
  }
}

-- site.pp

node ''mynode.example.com'' {
  include module1::app1
  include module2::app2
  include module3::app3
}

This will give me an error that packageA is already defined in another file.  I
*know* I''m missing something simple, but what is it?  How can I avoid
this situation of the duplicate package definitions while ensuring the resource
Package[''packageA''] is created?

I tried the following but I guess I''m not understanding the defined()
function properly:

class module1::app1 {
  if ! defined(Package[''packageA'']) {
    package {
      ''packageA'':
        ;
    }
  }
}

Forgive me if this is an oft asked question.  I couldn''t figure out the
search term that made sense that would match this scenario.  TIA

Mike.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/Q5kdE6TkzGYJ.
To post to this group, send email to
puppet-users@googlegroups.com<mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto: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.

On Mar 19, 4:29 am, Bernd Adamowicz <Bernd.Adamow...@esailors.de>
wrote:
> You need virtual resources:
Or else factor out the package to a separate class that all the others
include:

class module0::package_a {
  package {
    ''packageA'':
      ;
  }
}

class module1::app1 {
  include ''module0::package_a''
  # ...
}

class module2::app2 {
  include ''module0::package_a''
  # ...
}

class module3::app3 {
  include ''module0::package_a''
  # ...
}


John

-- 
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 19.3.2012 14:11, jcbollinger wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mar 19, 4:29 am, Bernd Adamowicz <Bernd.Adamow...@esailors.de>
> wrote:
>> You need virtual resources:
> 
> Or else factor out the package to a separate class that all the others
> include:
But which is better? Is it just a matter of personal preference?
What advantages one gains?
What does need more resources, performance-wise?
-- 
Kind Regards, Markus Falb

The use of a class to control Apache is more flexible - it allows you to 
encapsulate any common Apache logic into it''s own module that your
other
classes don''t need to worry about.

If you use virtual resources for example and you introduce Debian/Ubuntu 
operating systems, you have to go to all your modules that reference 
Package[httpd] and introduce logic that installs the Debian equivalent. 
On the flip side if you do this in a class, you only have to handle it 
in one place.

Using a class for Apache also gives you a place to put common 
configuration - maybe in a few months you want every single Apache, no 
matter where it is or who runs it, to have mod_status enabled.

On 19/03/12 13:18, Markus Falb wrote:
> On 19.3.2012 14:11, jcbollinger wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 19, 4:29 am, Bernd Adamowicz<Bernd.Adamow...@esailors.de>
>> wrote:
>>> You need virtual resources:
>> Or else factor out the package to a separate class that all the others
>> include:
> But which is better? Is it just a matter of personal preference?
> What advantages one gains?
> What does need more resources, performance-wise?

-- 
Luke Bigum

Information Systems
Ph: +44 (0) 20 3192 2520
luke.bigum@lmax.com | http://www.lmax.com
LMAX, Yellow Building, 1A Nicholas Road, London W11 4AN


The information in this e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is
intended only for the named recipient(s). The e-mail may not be disclosed or
used by any person other than the addressee, nor may it be copied in any way. If
you are not a named recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete
any copies of this message. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution
of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Any view or opinions
presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of the company.

-- 
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.