On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Stefan Schulte
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Doesnt feel right to me. The mount type doesnt describe the device, the
> title describes a mountpoint. So I read something like
> mount { '/foo': ensure => unmounted } as »there is nothing mounted on
> /foo«. And to me it sounds like you're reading the mounttype more like a
> description of the device and more like
>
> mount { '/dev/foo': mountpoint => '/foo', ensure =>unmounted}
>
> I mean if I specify file {'/foo': content => 'foo', ensure => absent }
> and puppet only finds a file called '/foo' with content 'bar' it doesnt
> report absent (= in sync). Yes there is no file with content 'foo' but
> the file is still there.
>
> So at least to me the new behaviour is not what I would normally expect.
Yep. We're going to treat the device much like "content" on the file
type to try and be consistent.
mount { "/mnt/a": ensure => unmounted, }
# Will ensure nothing is mounted at /mnt/a
mount { "/mnt/a": ensure => mounted, }
# Will ensure something is mounted at /mnt/a, if no device info is
available from fstab, fail.
mount { "/mnt/a": ensure => unmounted, device => "/dev/sda4" }
# Will ensure nothing is mounted at /mnt/a, device is essentially irrelevant
mount { "/mnt/a": ensure => mounted, device => "/dev/sda4" }
# Will ensure /dev/sda4 is mounted at /mnt/a
Does that match your expectations Stefan?
--
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.
