Issue #2896 has been updated by Patrick Mohr.

Josh Cooper wrote:
> Going through the backlog. As of 2.7.18, `puppet parser validate` does not 
> validate parameters. The `paramcheck` option was removed in 
> <https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/commit/4709e9b> over two and a half 
> years ago. Given that `puppet apply --noop` does validate the type, provider, 
> parameters, etc, is there any reason to keep this issue open?


So, my understanding is that `paramcheck` is cheap, in CPU and disk io.  Also, 
I think all you need is the facts to compile the catalog.  On the other hand, I 
believe that --noop will scream its head off if the source files don't exist, 
meaning it's not safe to fun on any computer.  It has to be run on the computer 
you plan to apply the catalog to.

Because of this, I checked by compiling catalogs using cached facts.

So, I think a better question is if manually compiling catalogs is a good 
replacement.
----------------------------------------
Feature #2896: `puppet parser validate` does not check resource parameters
https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2896#change-67556

Author: Dan Bode
Status: Accepted
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: parser
Target version: 2.7.x
Affected Puppet version: 0.25.1
Keywords: 
Branch: 


`puppet --parseonly` does not show an error when parsing:

    file{'name': bad_owner => 'invalid'}

This should also work for resource definitions.

    my_def($param_a='_UNSET_') {} 

    my_def{ 
      'my_def_1': 
      pram_a => 'foo'; 
    } 



-- 
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.

Reply via email to