Hi folks, apologies if this is the wrong channel but just wanted to let you all know that Puppet Belfast are hosting a Coffee Morning on the 28th September for Macmillan Cancer Support. It really is such an important charity, so if you're unable to make it physically in person, please consider donating at the link below. Thanks a million! https://coffeefundraising.macmillan.org.uk/fundraising/cm23025759

This message was deleted.

with a custom fact, can you confine to a fact value that’s not nil? i have a thing that might be constrained to a role, but there are multiple roles that apply. if you can’t confine to a non-null fact value, will confining to each of the possible fact values work? maybe something like this? it feels like it won’t work.

confine: :role::foo
confine: :role::bar

yes, look at the example here https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-lvm/blob/v2.0.2/lib/facter/lvm_support.rb

v2.0.3 is broken there, but v2.0.2 is using this technique

thanks

@nate When you really just need to check if not

nil

then you can use this

confine :networking do |f|
    !f.nil?
  end

The other examples will else always expect a fixed value. For structured facts you can use this construct:

confine :os do |os|
    os['name'] == 'CentOS'
  end

nice, nice

This message was deleted.

This message was deleted.

are there any docs available for writing a puppet face or adding an action to a face?

i guess i've been gone for a while ... what is the term "puppet face" referring to? ☝️

Essentially subcommands to the

puppet

command that you could create yourself. However, the Face API's are private and deprecated for public use: https://www.puppet.com/docs/puppet/5.5/deprecated_api.html#puppet-faces-is-a-private-api

ah ... i vaguely remember hearing the word being tossed about at one point, maybe i looked into it at the time and figured it wasn't something i needed, so i didn't allocate any storage to remember anything about it ... thanks

anyway, real question ... i'm going back and re-factoring some old code, and came across an

exec

with

refreshonly => true

... is there any way for puppet code to "send a notification" to this resource, other than declaring some other resource with

notify => Exec['xxx']

?

if not, is there any kind of "no-op" resource that i can declare in the catalog, that would not actually do anything on the target server? i remember there being an

anchor

type at one point, not sure if that's what i'm thinking of

From: https://www.puppet.com/docs/puppet/8/lang_relationships.html#lang_relationships-refreshing-and-notification

To specify that a resource must refresh when a related resource changes, create a notifying relationship with the

subscribe

or

notify

metaparameters or the notification chaining arrow (

~>

).

yup ... but that means there needs to be some other resource to the left of the

~>

operator

So the

exec

could have

subscribe => Something[foo]

.

hence my question about a no-op resource that i could use

that's just it, there isn't an existing resource ... the decision in this case would be within an

if

block

like, if there were a "no-op" resource, i could do

Noop['x'] ~> Exec['x']

Sorry, backing up... what's your goal here? You want to run the exec even though its configured as

refreshonly => true

?

in some cases, yes. the decision is not whether some other resource was updated or not, the decision is an explicit

if

statement in the code

something like

if ( $condition ) {
    noop { 'x' :
      notify => Exec['x'] ,
    }
  }

i just need something to use as the

noop

resource which, when declared, doesn't have any real effect on the target server, other than triggering the exec.

you can use notify, but I prefer echo from ipcrm/echo

See the

ipcrm-echo

module at https://forge.puppet.com/ipcrm/echo?src=slack&channel=puppet

notify will always be 'modified'

The

anchor

resource is maybe more appropriate here... but also... I feel like there's a misunderstanding of compile-time vs. enforcement-time logic here.