> Le 21 juil. 2015 à 20:33, Peter Huene <[email protected]> a écrit :

> 
> Thus there would be no "eth0:1" in the interfaces list; it would just show up 
> as the first element in the secondary array.  e.g. eth0:1 becomes 
> eth0.secondary.0, eth0:2 becomes eth0.secondary.1, etc.
> 
> Thoughts on this approach? It would better model the output of command line 
> tools that don't distinguish interfaces between "iface" and "iface:x".
> 
> Alternatively, we could keep eth0:1 in the list and have a reference to the 
> primary interface like you suggested.  I'm open to either approach.

I prefer to have no eth0:1 in the interfaces too, but it can break comptability 
with legacy code. I'm currently switching to facter 3, so that's not a problem 
for me, other might disagree.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/6F5D8E9E-DC38-402B-B254-85949A7DDC81%40orange.fr.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to