Please step into my office, and I'll remove you :-)

Or look at the mail headers and take appropriate action:

List-Unsubscribe:
<http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:[email protected]>

Regards,
Martijn.


On 25-01-11 07:48, [email protected] wrote:
>  
> 
>     --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* [email protected]
>     [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of
>     *[email protected]
>     *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2011 1:00 PM
>     *To:* Abridged Recipients
>     *Subject:* [Puppet Users] Abridged summary of
>     [email protected] - 45 Messages in 9 Topics
> 
>       Today's Topic Summary
> 
>     Group: http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/topics
> 
>         * scheduler problem? <#group_thread_0> [1 Update]
>         * Do we need a new name for "--test"? <#group_thread_1> [34 Updates]
>         * mcollective for rhel 4 <#group_thread_2> [2 Updates]
>         * Puppet dashboard don't show current day <#group_thread_3> [2
>           Updates]
>         * Behavior of local modules and their included facts
>           <#group_thread_4> [1 Update]
>         * problems with dependencies <#group_thread_5> [2 Updates]
>         * high 500 error rate on file metadata operations
>           <#group_thread_6> [1 Update]
>         * PSA: Please use <pre> tags when reporting bugs.
>           <#group_thread_7> [1 Update]
>         * another 2.6 question... stages <#group_thread_8> [1 Update] 
> 
>      Topic: scheduler problem?
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/e00eda15de69b533>
> 
>           Antony Mayi <[email protected]> Jan 24 11:29AM ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           Hi Nan,
>            
>           thanks. I have removed the schedule (re)definition but it does
>           still the same -
>           the tidy is called on every run (every 30 minutes). the
>           state.yaml after a
>           typical run has following more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/7199a3f934647c02>
> 
>      Topic: Do we need a new name for "--test"?
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/fbe7bcfe04b5f657>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 01:33PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>            
>           This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>            
>           What would be a better name for "--test"?
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/d3dd3cbe311368e8>
> 
>           Adam Nielsen <[email protected]> Jan 24 07:50AM +1000 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           > https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>            
>           > This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>            
>           > What would be a better name for "--test"?
>            
>           Using Gentoo's emerge as an example, how about more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4f4c6c8b58c491c2>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 02:15PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           >> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>            
>           >> What would be a better name for "--test"?
>            
>           > Using Gentoo's emerge as an example, how about --oneshot?
>            
>           It's more than that though.
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/69a330193ef7d96d>
> 
>           Denmat <[email protected]> Jan 24 09:35AM +1100 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           I was thinking '--update' as that is what it does but then that
>           doesn't describe the '--one-time' nature of it explicitly.
>            
>           I always felt funny updating hosts with 'test' though :)
>            
>           Hard one.
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/1313878342cdbaa7>
> 
>           Patrick <[email protected]> Jan 23 02:44PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Jan 23, 2011, at 1:50 PM, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>            
>            
>           >> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>            
>           >> What would be a better name for "--test"?
>            
>           > Using Gentoo's emerge as an example, how more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/32700f78acf03e7>
> 
>           Daniel Pittman <[email protected]> Jan 23 03:35PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           My inclination is to say that "ontime" or "verbose" have stolen
>           the name for
>           another concept; perhaps "interactive" covers the standard
>           use-case well
>           enough?
>            
>           Daniel
>            
>           >>> What would be a better more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/ba3086cb22134102>
> 
>           Dan Bode <[email protected]> Jan 23 03:38PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           > >>> https://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2476
>            
>           > >>> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>            
>           > >>> What would be a better name for "--test"?
>            
>           maybe we could keep --test and add more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/76601ceef12222cd>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 03:48PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           >> >>> This does seem to confuse a fair few new users.
>            
>           >> >>> What would be a better name for "--test"?
>            
>           > maybe we could keep --test and add --noop to the list of
>           options in sets.
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/244d60976141b243>
> 
>           James Louis <[email protected]> Jan 23 06:02PM -0600 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           and what is the current functionality for the --test option?
>            
>            
>           -- 
>           “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the
>           things that you
>           didn’t do than by the ones you did do. more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/e8eae94aa11e26d8>
> 
>           Patrick <[email protected]> Jan 23 04:42PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:02 PM, James Louis wrote:
>            
>           > and what is the current functionality for the --test option?
>            
>           To quote Nigel:
>            
>           --onetime
>           --no-daemonize
>           --ignorecache
>           --verbose more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4b97b5f36bd44de0>
> 
>           James Louis <[email protected]> Jan 23 06:47PM -0600 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           that tells what options are applied when --test is used but
>           doesn't explain
>           the functionality of --test (i.e. --test is an option to enable
>           the puppet
>           agent to test it's connection to the puppet more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/908f0f7f43eb6443>
> 
>           Stefan Schulte <[email protected]> Jan 24 01:49AM
>           +0100 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 03:48:16PM -0800, Nigel Kersten wrote:
>           > some sympathy for that position, but before we can get there,
>           we need
>           > to have a name for the existing functionality that I don't
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/ff53e41916079ae3>
> 
>           Patrick <[email protected]> Jan 23 04:50PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:47 PM, James Louis wrote:
>            
>           > that tells what options are applied when --test is used but
>           doesn't explain the functionality of --test (i.e. --test is an
>           option to enable the more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/716d2ac4f39c3907>
> 
>           James Louis <[email protected]> Jan 23 06:53PM -0600 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           exactly. to what purpose?
>            
>            
>           -- 
>           “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the
>           things that you
>           didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the
>           bowlines. Sail away more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/2db6dda09757cd4f>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 05:22PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           > exactly. to what purpose?
>            
>           To trigger an immediate run on a client with the common options used
>           when testing a real run, not a noop run.
>            
>           If there was a clear word that described this more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/f353c7fb94ce4412>
> 
>           James Louis <[email protected]> Jan 23 07:34PM -0600 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           so the actual changes take place, if any, during a test vs a
>           noop which does
>           not let the actual changes take place. So this would be used
>           primarily for
>           configuration testing? Or perhaps for more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/6b548d99953bbd1f>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 05:51PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           > so the actual changes take place, if any, during a test vs a
>           noop which does
>           > not let the actual changes take place. So this would be used
>           primarily for
>           > configuration testing? Or perhaps for more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/3994d632374b04de>
> 
>           eshamow <[email protected]> Jan 23 05:58PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           I can tell you that for me, and for my group, it's a halfway step
>           between reloading Puppet and watching the logs, and a full
>           --debug --
>           no-daemonize run.
>            
>           So for instance, when they're more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/ae6e3bb895a0258c>
> 
>           James Louis <[email protected]> Jan 23 08:16PM -0600 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           so the purpose of having a noop is to run the same test but to
>           not actually
>           make any changes. do we get the same debug messages, etc?
>            
>            
>           -- 
>           “Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/80c79a8f81fa29d>
> 
>           Patrick <[email protected]> Jan 23 07:23PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           No, because sometimes making the changes causes the error.
>            
>           For instance, if you are using a File resource to create a file
>           in a read-only file-system (which isn't possible) the resource
>           will tell more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/d1b35186370e1f99>
> 
>           Patrick <[email protected]> Jan 23 07:26PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:53 PM, James Louis wrote:
>            
>            
>           > > that tells what options are applied when --test is used but
>           doesn't explain the functionality of --test (i.e. --test is an
>           option to enable the more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/6f0ed82ca21de926>
> 
>           Patrick <[email protected]> Jan 23 07:27PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Jan 23, 2011, at 5:58 PM, eshamow wrote:
>            
>            
>           > It might be wise to consider combining a bunch of similar options
>           > (verbose, test, debug, etc) into a "verbose" with levels of
>           output -- more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/b53be26b1d611377>
> 
>           Patrick <[email protected]> Jan 23 07:30PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:49 PM, Stefan Schulte wrote:
>            
>           > (maybe it does so already). We could then say --test --no-noop
>           to match
>           > current behaviour.
>            
>           > -Stefan
>            
>            
>           I think this is a really bad more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c40dcb1e2545c4dc>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 07:38PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           >> -Stefan
>            
>           > I think this is a really bad idea because I really think
>           Puppet has broken a lot of things recently and people use --test
>           in automatic scripts.
>            
>           > This is really almost always an more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/8ddaf1872f18c305>
> 
>           Jesse Reynolds <[email protected]> Jan 23 10:27PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           --manual
>            
>           ?
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c33ee19af8a85b7a>
> 
>           Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <[email protected]> Jan 24 07:56AM +0100 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           > I know some people use it whenever they want "--verbose
>           --no-daemonize
>           > --onetime".
>            
>           This is common use of the puppet agent at my site.
>            
>           -- 
>           Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/22903c06821f6248>
> 
>           Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <[email protected]> Jan 24 08:36AM +0100 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           > --manual
>            
>           Looks better than --interactive, since I don't assume it will start
>           asking me questions. :)
>            
>           -- 
>           Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
>           Oooo, shiny!
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/5485e90e6f2b4296>
> 
>           Daniel Pittman <[email protected]> Jan 24 12:13AM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           >>   --manual
>            
>           > Looks better than --interactive, since I don't assume it will
>           start
>           > asking me questions. :)
>            
>           I like it too.
>           Daniel
>           -- 
>           ⎋ Puppet Labs Developer – more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/f3c2d0ba394e2fff>
> 
>           DEGREMONT Aurelien <[email protected]> Jan 24 09:27AM
>           +0100 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           Nigel Kersten a écrit :
>           > when testing a real run, not a noop run.
>            
>           > If there was a clear word that described this functionality, we
>           > probably wouldn't be having this discussion.
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/559a57524f22842b>
> 
>           "Carles Amigó" <[email protected]> Jan 24 11:38AM +0100
>           ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           +1
>            
>           El 24/01/2011 9:13, Daniel Pittman escribió:
>           >> asking me questions. :)
>            
>           > I like it too.
>           > Daniel
>            
>           -- 
>           Carles Amigó
>           Linux System Administrator
>           [email protected]
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4a0be4f51eb4066e>
> 
>           Adam Nielsen <[email protected]> Jan 24 09:00PM +1000 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           > --verbose
>           > --no-usecacheonfailure
>            
>           > and I think I'm missing some newer additions too.
>            
>           Hmm that's true, and it is similar to --onetime. How about
>           --explain? The
>           end result is that you get more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/192cc6d6dafb738>
> 
>           Jonathan Gazeley <[email protected]> Jan 24 11:01AM
>           ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           On 24/01/11 11:00, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>           > added to do the same with no-op as well.
>            
>           > Cheers,
>           > Adam.
>            
>           How about simply --once ? Nice and quick to type.
>            
>           Jonathan
>            
>           -- more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/19f7280b37790b73>
> 
>           Adam Nielsen <[email protected]> Jan 24 09:11PM +1000 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           >> Hmm that's true, and it is similar to --onetime. How about
>           --explain?
>           >> The end result is that you get a detailed explanation of what
>           is happening.
>            
>           > How about simply --once ? Nice and quick more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c19d135db7d8c956>
> 
>           Thorsten Biel <[email protected]> Jan 24 12:22PM +0100 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Jan 24, 2011, at 12:00, Adam Nielsen wrote:
>            
>            
>           >> and I think I'm missing some newer additions too.
>            
>           > Hmm that's true, and it is similar to --onetime. How about
>           --explain? The end result is more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/dac514ef05060f52>
> 
>      Topic: mcollective for rhel 4
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/4c6bbbe891d71082>
> 
>           eshamow <[email protected]> Jan 23 05:23PM -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           The Fedora 13 SRPMs backport pretty easily, and you get the
>           advantage
>           of Ruby 1.8.6.
>            
>           -Eric
>            
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/e523b679921a0f35>
> 
>           Ohad Levy <[email protected]> Jan 24 11:08AM +0200 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
> 
>           > The Fedora 13 SRPMs backport pretty easily, and you get the
>           advantage
>           > of Ruby 1.8.6.
>            
>           > -Eric
>            
>           Sure, but for those who don't want to replace/break the
>           internals of ruby on
>           rhel4... :)
>            
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/540eca7921dacb0f>
> 
>      Topic: Puppet dashboard don't show current day
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/6d9c8dda8feda0ff>
> 
>           Nicolas Aizier <[email protected]> Jan 23 05:43PM
>           -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           I made some more research on this problem and found another one. I
>           think it's linked.
>            
>           The 30th day of puppet (the one the more on the left side in puppet-
>           dashboard) is slowly decrasing in term more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/20844acbfb20284e>
> 
>           Nicolas Aizier <[email protected]> Jan 23 09:48PM
>           -0800 ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           Raised bug #5983 about those points.
>            
>           On Jan 24, 11:43 am, Nicolas Aizier <[email protected]>
>           wrote:
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/2de3d92e0352da4c>
> 
>      Topic: Behavior of local modules and their included facts
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/de0c9b342bd7007>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 02:18PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Nick Fagerlund
>           > issues/4180). This was never fixed in 0.25.x, right? Should we
>           re-open
>           > or file a new ticket?
>            
>           > (Also, should this bug be mentioned in the more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/c22a49d9fed12797>
> 
>      Topic: problems with dependencies
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/da35198378c28b21>
> 
>           "russell.fulton" <[email protected]> Jan 23 01:17PM -0800
>           ^ <#digest_top>
>            
>           Thanks John... using before worked.
>            
>           I'm new to puppet and I found the independent resource chaining
>           stuff
>           before I found 'before' which I note is not mentioned anywhere
>           in the
>           docs for exec.
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/641f0980d2171af>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 02:17PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 1:17 PM, russell.fulton
>           > docs for exec.
>            
>           > is this a doc bug or is it a generic option available with all
>           > resources?
>            
>           It's the latter Russell. You can find them all in more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4b7ca4d915cfd26c>
> 
>      Topic: high 500 error rate on file metadata operations
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/8f78a3f1d71afa2>
> 
>           Daniel Pittman <[email protected]> Jan 23 01:59PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           > logging of puppet errors. I've done some analysis of the logs
>           that I
>           > have and found that the majority of the 500s (~83%) received
>           by our
>           > Ubuntu clients are on file metadata operations:
>           more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/3554c5d0fc1cddf9>
> 
>      Topic: PSA: Please use <pre> tags when reporting bugs.
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/5e4c1ffd8b340533>
> 
>           Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> Jan 23 01:48PM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           It's particularly difficult to understand what's going on with a
>           given
>           bug report when the log/manifest/terminal output is all being
>           mis-interpreted as Markdown text.
>            
>           We'll definitely try and more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/acc9991164c5415e>
> 
>      Topic: another 2.6 question... stages
>     <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/t/2aa399bda4e013fb>
> 
>           Daniel Pittman <[email protected]> Jan 23 09:49AM -0800 ^
>           <#digest_top>
>            
>           > }
>            
>           > Is it safe to assume that "foo" will always be managed during
>           the preamble
>           > stage regardless of other definitions?
>            
>           Puppet will treat a dependency that would violate that
>           expectation as more...
>           <http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users/msg/4c4b9441463c6826>
> 
>     -- 
>     You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>     Groups "Puppet Users" 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-users?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Users" 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-users?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" 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-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to