Do you have time to jump into #cfengine? if not I would need more info to make sure you couldn't accomplish the same thing without multiple calls for cfexecd. I don't know if there is a "reason" other than oversight. I wanted this in for quite sometime. I worked on the code at a certain point. I don't think it involved a whole lot.
Mark might have a reason for not doing it. There might even be a bug open about this. So what is cingular doing with Cfengine? On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 12:59 -0700, Martin, Jason H wrote: > Is there any particular reason that cfexecd doesn't allow arbitrary > flags to be passed to cfagent? cfrun lets you do a "-- -D someclass" > to pass arguments to cfagent, but this doesn't work for cfexecd. I > need to do this as I want to run a set of rules once per directory on > a given host, and there is no way to iterate most cfe rules over a > given set of destinations. Instead, I am iterating CFE entirely over > that set of directories. > > I need to define a class with the name of the directory. I would do it > via a module except that the directory name is not known at > rule-writing time, so CFE is pruning away all of the rules for the > class before the module runs. > > Another way to approach the problem is to ask if it is possible to > disable the pruning of rules at parse time. The effect would be > similar to adding every possible class to AddInstallable. > > Thank you, > -Jason Martin > _______________________________________________ > Help-cfengine mailing list > Help-cfengine@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine -- Christian Pearce Perfect Order, Inc. http://www.sysnav.com http://www.perfectorder.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Help-cfengine mailing list Help-cfengine@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
