Issue #12115 has been updated by Randall Hansen.
Daniel Pittman wrote: > Otherwise I am tempted to say that any feature other than that one, very > specific, use case should be turned off until we find an actual use-case for > them. I agree. This seems like configurability looking for a problem. ---------------------------------------- Bug #12115: 'Local' file bucket behavior doesn't match documentation https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/12115 Author: Josh Cooper Status: Needs Decision Priority: Normal Assignee: Randall Hansen Category: fileserving Target version: Affected Puppet version: 2.7.9 Keywords: file bucket Branch: The usage for command `puppet filebucket backup` says that, "Alternatively, you can use your local file bucket by specifying '--local'. However, it actually stores the file in `$vardir/bucket`: <pre> $ rm -rf ~/.puppet $ puppet filebucket backup -l /dev/null /dev/null: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e $ find ~/.puppet/var/*bucket /Users/josh/.puppet/var/bucket/d/4/1/d/8/c/d/9/d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e </pre> Note there's no var/clientbucket. I would have expected it to write to $vardir/clientbucket, since the documentation in defaults.rb says, ":clientbucketdir => { :desc => Where FileBucket files are stored locally.}" The `file` face behaves the same way: <pre> $ puppet file store /dev/null Users/josh/.puppet/var/bucket/d/4/1/d/8/c/d/9/d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e </pre> It seems wrong that the "local" file bucket for an agent would be $vardir/bucket, though it might make sense in master run mode, I'm not sure. This issue was discovered while researching the acceptance test for #6541. It was trying to preload the local bucket using the `puppet filebucket backup -l /dev/null` command, which was writing the $vardir/bucket. Then later the test was trying to retrieve the file using a file resource with content => '{md5}d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e' in `puppet apply`, but failing because puppet was looking in $vardir/clientbucket. I'm honestly not sure what the right behavior is supposed to be. It seems strange that an agent would have two file buckets. But perhaps that's because the test was using `puppet apply` and not `puppet agent --onetime`. Or perhaps the behavior needs to be better documented about what 'local' means in these different contexts. -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/my/account -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Bugs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-bugs?hl=en.
