Your forward DNS name can be anything.
Your reverse DNS name *must* be one of the DNS entries in your cert,
the primary hostname by default.
Trevor
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Forrie for...@gmail.com wrote:
Puppet docs require a PUPPET server name -- which I presumed a CNAME
would
On Jan 18, 3:11 pm, Forrie for...@gmail.com wrote:
Puppet docs require a PUPPET server name -- which I presumed a CNAME
would suffice. However, I'm finding that's not the case - as the SSL
cert generated is for the actual system name pupptmasterd runs on
(makes sense).
The server that
hey,
- jcbollinger john.bollin...@stjude.org wrote:
On Jan 18, 3:11 pm, Forrie for...@gmail.com wrote:
Puppet docs require a PUPPET server name -- which I presumed a
CNAME
would suffice. However, I'm finding that's not the case - as the
SSL
cert generated is for the actual system
R.I.Pienaar wrote:
I'd avoid editing the sysconfig file for this purpose, it just makes
running commands like puppetd --test a pain. Editing the
puppet.conf is best.
That's good advice. As David Lutterkort noted in #2699¹:
... the sysconfig files were created before puppet had its own
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Ohad Levy ohadl...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, that's true, but in my opinion cobbler support in Puppet is lacking,
that was one of the reason I've started Foreman.
cheers,
Ohad
You may also want to look at Symbolic, which integrates Puppet, Func,
and Cobbler all
I'd like others to have the option to temporarily disable puppet from
modify a file or directory...something along the lines of:
./something.conf.lock
causes
./something.conf
to NOT be modified by puppet for as long the lock file exists
it'd also be nice to be able to disable an entire
2010/1/19 jb jeffb...@gmail.com:
I'd like others to have the option to temporarily disable puppet from
modify a file or directory...something along the lines of:
./something.conf.lock
causes
./something.conf
to NOT be modified by puppet for as long the lock file exists
We discussed the
As this would generally be a manual change, I would use 'chattr +i' on
Linux systems.
Trevor
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:14 PM, jb jeffb...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like others to have the option to temporarily disable puppet from
modify a file or directory...something along the lines of:
Trevor Vaughan wrote:
As this would generally be a manual change, I would use 'chattr +i' on
Linux systems.
I haven't tried, but won't this cause the client to throw an error?
-scott
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to
Yes. But, in theory, this is a temporary measure.
If it's not, then why are you managing that file in the first place?
Trevor
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Scott Smith sc...@ohlol.net wrote:
Trevor Vaughan wrote:
As this would generally be a manual change, I would use 'chattr +i' on
I'm having an issue using package resources on RHEL 4 systems using
up2date with RHN. I need to ensure that libacl.i386 is installed on a
x86_64 system, however the up2date provider does not seem to like the
yum syntax for specifying arch, and there doesn't seem to be any other
method for doing
Trevor Vaughan wrote:
Yes. But, in theory, this is a temporary measure.
If it's not, then why are you managing that file in the first place?
I monitor puppetd errors with splunk, so this could cause someone to get
paged =(
Good idea for those of us who don't, though :)
(If I see a
The scenario is this: developer needs, in an emergency situation, to
edit a file that is normally under puppet control (it's a conf file
for our java servlet engine). I'm not around to help out, he may not
have root.
I'd fully want/expect this to generate a puppet error, at least in my
case,
I read somewhere recently about problems with Puppet and Ruby 1.9.
I'm wondering if this is still an issue?
Thanks.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Puppet Users group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com.
To
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Why not use the 'noop' metaparam?
Instead of a notouch file, how about .file.noop which would simply set
noop = 'true' for that run perhaps with an extended message about using
a noop file.
Trevor
On 01/19/2010 04:37 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
On
I'm running into a problem with trying to get both an rpm and a gem
installed that have the same name. Predictably, this is the mysql
package.
Currently my mysql class's look like:
class mysql {
service { 'mysql':
ensure = 'running',
enable = true
}
user { 'mysql':
Hi Michael,
Happy to see you around puppet :)
Thanks, I did see it before, I still chose to implement foreman, a few of
the reasons were:
1. I need to support non RH servers (e.g. Debian and Solaris where func and
friends don't play ball)
2. I wanted to have one single interface regardless on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You wanted release early, release often and the Puppet team has
delivered!
The 0.25.4 release is a maintenance release (with one important
feature - pre/post transaction hooks - discussed below) in the
0.25.x branch. The release addresses a
my server being on 0.24.8 and this machine on which port is not
opening is on 0.25.1
The other client machines on which i have been able to open up the
port are on 0.24.8.
Is it because of this that port isn't opening up?Please revert.If
thats the case will try with version 0.24.8 on client.
clients must be equal or older then the server... are you sure your setup is
working?
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:39 PM, lovewadhwa lovewad...@gmail.com wrote:
my server being on 0.24.8 and this machine on which port is not
opening is on 0.25.1
The other client machines on which i have been
20 matches
Mail list logo
