I haven't looked at the actual provider yet, but you should be able to
distribute it yourself with pluginsync to 0.25.x clients once it's
been sorted.
We really need community testing with this provider. There are some
questions Rudy has in the ticket log that we need to get answered.
Hi Peter, it's awesome to have you here.
We *love* machine parseable output in Puppet land :)
>
> I have changed the exit code to 0 (Rudy #10).
>
> /peter
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to puppet...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
>
>
--
Nigel Kersten - Puppet Labs - http://www.puppetlabs.com
Sorry for arriving rather late to this thread!
On 16/11/10 10:17, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
> On Nov 12, 4:54 pm, Peter Bonivart <shuttle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think the issue with "Not installed" vs. "notinst" is probably from
>> converting the pkg-get provider, if I'm not mistaken pkg-get prints
>> "Not installed" so that should just be "notinst" instead. I'm thinking
>> about adding an option for machine parseable output to make these
>> things better.
>
> Pachine parseable output would be very nice, but in my opinion not
> that 'urgent'. We can parse it like it is.
As Rudy said, we are able to parse the pkgutil output as-is, though it
would be great if there was a "quieter" mode for pkgutil as it can be
quite noisy. It's difficult to determine where the noise ends and the
package listings begin.
For example, with use_gpg checked, pkgutil outputs "Checking integrity"
messages and gpg itself outputs key information. If a catalog has to be
fetched (say catalog_update is 0, or expiry has been reached), then we
get information about which files are being fetched, plus wget output
(if -q isn't used).
I intend to start up a patch thread soon on puppet-dev with the combined
commits from James, Maciej, Rudy and me to begin the process of getting
the provider included.
Regards,
--
Dominic Cleal
Red Hat Consulting
m: +44 (0)7818 512168
On Oct 15, 2014 3:55 AM, "Frederic Conrotte" <frederic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> Like many enterprises, we have an heterogeneous infrastructure with some CentOS and Solaris machines.
>
> I was wondering if lookthere are existing plans about creating for Solaris the equivalent of the "yumrepo" type ?
Unless this has changed in versions later than what I'm using, pkgutil only supports a single repository, so it's really just a matter of configuring pkgutil.conf. 'yumrepo' is useful because there can be any number of repos defined.
Wil