[PATCH/facter 1/3] Discussion on ec2 facts - #2346
[PATCH/facter 2/3] Fixed #2346 - Part 1: Added arp fact for Linux
[PATCH/facter 3/3] Fixed #2346 - A much cleverer EC2 fact
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Developers group.
To post to this
From: Paul Nasrat pnas...@googlemail.com
The EC2 fact is completely broken at the moment:
* Timeout::Error isn't caught by rescue (due to how it inherits)
* The issue of wrong open semantics outlined here, this is causing hidden
immediate failure
* The fact is going to cause a 2 second wait to
Added facts arp (like the ipaddress etc) facts
Added facts arp_interfacename
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull ja...@lovedthanlost.net
---
Local-branch: tickets/master/2346
lib/facter/arp.rb | 22 ++
lib/facter/util/ip.rb | 11 +--
The fact now checks for an EC2 ARP or in the EU Zone for an EC2 MAC
This should mean the fact's return is much more robust
The fact also now supports returning userdata (which is a bit ugly
given Facter returns strings but a good bookmark for refactor in 2.0)
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull
- Vendor the json_shape library, a lightweight JSON schema validator (
https://github.com/jes5199/json_shape).
I'm fully in support of this proposal, with one caveat: The definition of
'vendor'. Do you mean creating a vendor directly in the puppet repo and
adding it as a gem there, or
+1 been pending for too long
On 8 March 2011 10:28, James Turnbull ja...@lovedthanlost.net wrote:
From: Paul Nasrat pnas...@googlemail.com
The EC2 fact is completely broken at the moment:
* Timeout::Error isn't caught by rescue (due to how it inherits)
* The issue of wrong open semantics
Paul Nasrat wrote:
+1 been pending for too long
Was that a +1 on patches 2 and 3 in that series also? I largely rewrote
the whole fact.
James
--
James Turnbull
Puppet Labs
1-503-734-8571
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Developers group.
On Feb 9, 10:21 am, James Turnbull ja...@puppetlabs.com wrote:
Garrett Honeycutt wrote:
* Alphabetized properties
* Added documentation for acceptable values
* Added the following properties:
atime
canmount
checksum
devices
exec
logbias
nbmand
Garrett Honeycutt wrote:
We currently are not doing validation and do not have all the
properties listed. I propose that we accept this patch, since it adds
the rest of the missing properties and create a new ticket to add
validation to the entirety of the properties. This gives will ensure
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Markus Roberts mar...@puppetlabs.comwrote:
Thinking about it though (and after looking at the code), do you need the
little bit at the top there to be executed? Why can't you just do something
like:
Puppet::Util.expects(:execute).with { |command,options|
From: Matt Robinson m...@puppetlabs.com
Paired-with: Daniel Pittman dan...@puppetlabs.com
Signed-off-by: Max Martin m...@puppetlabs.com
---
Local-branch: ticket/next/4798-rdoc-fixes
lib/puppet/application/doc.rb |8 +---
lib/puppet/defaults.rb|4
2 files changed, 5
There were some regressions discovered after the merge that these patches fix.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Developers group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-dev@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
1. Added tested
2. Refactored to use F:U:R.exec
3. Chomp trailing newline
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull ja...@lovedthanlost.net
---
Local-branch: tickets/master/5485
lib/facter/selinux.rb | 11 +++
spec/unit/data/selinux_sestatus |4
spec/unit/selinux_spec.rb
Hello Puppet Hackers,
We've been doing a lot of working trying to improve the state of
Puppet's test suite lately, so we've been a bit stricter on asking for
good tests with code submissions. We've updated the testing puppet
wiki page with some helpful guidelines, and hopefully made it clearer
Thinking about it though (and after looking at the code), do you need the
little bit at the top there to be executed? Why can't you just do something
like:
Puppet::Util.expects(:execute).with { |command,options| ... }
This was the first approach I tried. There were three reasons it
Whoops, a minor typo with rake mail_patches made it look like Why The Lucky
Stiff worked on this patch with us. Sorry to disappoint y'all, it was just
me and Max.
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 3:13 PM, y...@ktaadn.puppetlabs.lan wrote:
From: Paul Berry p...@puppetlabs.com
Paired-with: Max Martin
When adding a test for #6309, decided to refactor mount provider
integration tests by adding return value to check_fstab method.
Paired-with:Paul Berry p...@puppetlabs.com
Signed-off-by: Max Martin m...@puppetlabs.com
---
spec/integration/provider/mount_spec.rb | 38
So far this terminus only supports find and save. Search is forthcoming. It
uses two new tables (inventory_host and inventory_facts) so that it won't
interact with storedconfigs.
Paired-With: Jacob Helwig
Signed-off-by: Nick Lewis n...@puppetlabs.com
---
Timestamps are currently the only supported metadata for searching.
Paired-With: Max Martin
Reviewed-By: Jacob Helwig
Signed-off-by: Nick Lewis n...@puppetlabs.com
---
.../indirector/facts/inventory_active_record.rb| 42 --
.../facts/inventory_active_record_spec.rb | 89
There were some warnings and stack traces in the spec output that aren't
necessary.
The only interesting fix is of the message:
lib/puppet/module.rb:79 warning: multiple values for a block parameter (0 for 1)
from lib/puppet/util/logging.rb:30
If you call any form of logging on a module you
From: Daniel Pittman dan...@rimspace.net
In the final combination test we need to mark Solaris pending, because we
genuinely have a bug where we can't test due to stubbing order.
---
spec/unit/provider/mount/parsed_spec.rb | 11 ---
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
From: Daniel Pittman dan...@rimspace.net
When a new fstab fixture is added, we also want to try to test mount output.
If that fixture is missing, we would have failed a test, but now mark it
pending.
This is more correct when, for example, we don't yet have that fixture: it
isn't technically a
- Adds support for Slamd64 and Bluewhite64 for the operatingsystem
fact
- Adds support for Slamd64 and Bluewhite64 for the
operatingsystemrelease fact
Signed-off-by: Adrien Thebo adr...@puppetlabs.com
---
Local-branch: tickets/next/2721
lib/facter/operatingsystem.rb|8
Does this use a different db than storeconfigs?
Aren't the facts already available in storeconfigs?
This seems an odd choice, if the answer to both of those questions is yes.
On Mar 8, 2011, at 4:48 PM, Nick Lewis wrote:
So far this terminus only supports find and save. Search is forthcoming.
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Luke Kanies l...@puppetlabs.com wrote:
Does this use a different db than storeconfigs?
Aren't the facts already available in storeconfigs?
This seems an odd choice, if the answer to both of those questions is yes.
There was an RFC about this design choice:
On Mar 8, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Luke Kanies l...@puppetlabs.com wrote:
Does this use a different db than storeconfigs?
Aren't the facts already available in storeconfigs?
This seems an odd choice, if the answer to both of those questions is
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Luke Kanies l...@puppetlabs.com wrote:
On Mar 8, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Luke Kanies l...@puppetlabs.com wrote:
Does this use a different db than storeconfigs?
Aren't the facts already available in storeconfigs?
On Mar 8, 2011, at 6:09 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Luke Kanies l...@puppetlabs.com wrote:
On Mar 8, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Luke Kanies l...@puppetlabs.com wrote:
Does this use a different db than storeconfigs?
On Red Hat, Ubuntu, Debian and deriatives the -r flag
allows creation of system users with a UID below that
defined in /etc/login.defs.
This commit adds support for a system parameter and a
system_users feature which can be used like so:
user { foo:
system = true,
ensure =
29 matches
Mail list logo
