On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 07:13:01AM -0500, Aleksey Tsalolikhin wrote:
>In a nutshell, a bundle is a group of one or more promises.
>
>Whereas a promise BODY is the details of a particular promise that
>qualifies it and constrains its nature.
>
>
>need a good example, I think
Apropos of a recent thr
In a nutshell, a bundle is a group of one or more promises.
Whereas a promise BODY is the details of a particular promise that
qualifies it and constrains its nature.
need a good example, I think
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Bas van der Vlies wrote:
> David,
>
> For me the following docume
David,
For me the following documentation helped a lot between the difference
between bundles and bodies:
* http://www.cfengine.org/pages/syntax
And then use the reference guide for a better explanation of the options.
--
Hi, David. You might find it of use to go through my class, I've got a 2:41 hr
video online, and downloadable examples:
http://www.verticalsysadmin.com/cfengine/
That's in addition to the online materials, not instead of them.
I tried to learn Cfengine from the website and really struggled - onc
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 02:24:27PM -0500, no-re...@cfengine.com wrote:
>Forum: Cfengine Help
>Subject: Re: cfengine3 processes
>Author: neilhwatson
>Link to topic: https://cfengine.com/forum/read.php?3,21013,21067#msg-21067
>
>The current level of documentation is quite good. Still I think that th
David,
we make these packages at various intervals as time permits. Always
trying to do better, we also have a limited number of cycles, so we have
to fit the freebies into the harsh realities of making our supper!
Please keep letting us know how to improve and we'll hopefully get there
asymptot
It turns out to be surprisingly hard to write a cookbook that people
find easy to understand, but we keep trying. Soon we'll be making a
major overhaul of our website to try to make sense of all the
information we have.
Sometimes too much information is worse than not enough. We'll keep
slogging
2011/3/10 David Lee :
> Sorry, Mark. Yes, there was an element of letting off steam, partly
> because I'm still struggling, despite significant cf-2 experience, to
> get my poor little head around cf-3. (I could really, really do with a
> "cookbook"; and with step-by-step definitions and example
Sorry, Mark. Yes, there was an element of letting off steam, partly
because I'm still struggling, despite significant cf-2 experience, to
get my poor little head around cf-3. (I could really, really do with a
"cookbook"; and with step-by-step definitions and examples. The
definitions and de
That sounds great. Many thanks, Mark.
My background in OSS, both as user and contributor (Samba, Linux-HA,
etc.) teaches me that I should offer to test and validate this for the
greater good of us all. Sadly, I'm not really in a position to be able
to do the full checkout, import, configure,
This bug has been corrected in svn.
On 03/10/2011 10:09 AM, David Lee wrote:
> David Lee wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> And now I find that the one major advance that, in the documentation,
>> had looked really promising, namely the concept of services, appears to
>> have been deliberately hobbled in th
David,
if by open source you mean "free beer" then, your worst fears are
confirmed. There is a paid version of cfengine, and it is better than
the free one! (The audacity!) However, it is still apparently free to
let off steam, which seems to be your main aim here.
In fact services were introduc
David Lee wrote:
> [...]
> And now I find that the one major advance that, in the documentation,
> had looked really promising, namely the concept of services, appears to
> have been deliberately hobbled in the community edition. (I hope
> someone can tell me it's not so.) Sigh.
And a bug, t
Perhaps you could elaborate a bit on which concepts in Cf3 you would
like to see documented?
I suggest you have a look at the links at
http://www.cfengine.org/pages/manual_guides (if you have not already)
There is a guide specifically for cf2 users, and also a tutorial and
concept guide..
The solu
no-re...@cfengine.com wrote:
> According to the docs:
>
> The process_stop is also arguably a command, but it should be an ephemeral
> command that does not lead to a persistent process. It is intended only for
> commands of the form ‘/etc/inetd service stop’, not for processes that
> persist.
15 matches
Mail list logo
