On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:48 AM, James Turnbull<[email protected]> wrote: > Nigel Kersten wrote: >> So the missing piece with this new setup seems to be that you *must* >> create a fileserver.conf entry of: >> >> [modules] >> allow * >> >> for modules in environments to work correctly, whether or not you >> represent the URI in the old style: >> puppet:///modulename/filename.txt >> >> or the new style: >> puppet:///modules/modulename/filename.txt >> >> Patch working happily after that. > > Is this unexpected behaviour? Should we have an error message triggered > somehow or will updates and documentation be sufficient?
I kind of feel like we should automatically create the modules mount just like we do the plugins and facts mount points, but if others disagree, we should at the very least provide an example fileserver.conf that is well commented? > > Regards > > James Turnbull > > -- > Author of: > * Pro Linux Systems Administration > (http://tinyurl.com/linuxadmin) > * Pulling Strings with Puppet > (http://tinyurl.com/pupbook) > * Pro Nagios 2.0 > (http://tinyurl.com/pronagios) > * Hardening Linux > (http://tinyurl.com/hardeninglinux) > > -- Nigel Kersten [email protected] System Administrator Google, Inc. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" 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-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
