On Thursday, December 19, 2013 6:40:00 AM UTC-6, Felix Frank wrote: > > On 12/19/2013 01:20 PM, Erik Dal�n wrote: > > You could run it on the service type though to stop services you haven't > > explicitly set to run. For services even the stopped ones are present on > > the system. > > Ahh, via ensure => stopped in the resources instance? Is ensure a > metaparameter? I wasn't aware this was possible - fascinating. > >
No, 'ensure' is not a metaparameter (http://docs.puppetlabs.com/references/3.stable/metaparameter.html). It is an ordinary parameter that many (but not all) resource types have, and to which both internal and external conventions pertain. Among those, 'ensure' is the property with which purging interacts (which is why Resources that do not have an 'ensure' parameter cannot be purged). I can't see how one would use a Resources resource to ensure services 'stopped' instead of 'absent'. At the same time, it is a reasonable concern that the proposed patch would break purging via Resources instances. If it did, though, I think it would be possible to work around that. The general idea is feasible. The challenge appears to be to continue to provide the current behavior for the 'resource' face while making the 'agent' and 'apply' faces avoid performing the kind of unneeded work that Aurelien identified. Is there a way for the Puppet internals to determine which face they are servicing? John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/674b28e0-2472-45b1-9ca6-dedfb179f7ba%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
