That's still config to manage config. Seems weird to me to be so against just leaving the file in the standard location 🤷

that formats much better in slack. 😆

If I were in Glowing Bear, it'd work here too lol

so i'm asking $coworker about it. apparently the r10k module has an option to manage the location of the file, but it doesn't really work because it's hard-coded in the service definition.

so it's less about wanting to move it and more that moving it seems to be possible but doesn't work

or so i'm being told

I’m the original reporter, and the root of the ticket was just that I was upgrading from an ancient version of the ruby webhook, which had the config file for the webhook in a different location. Just to be lazy, I changed

r10k::webhook::config::config_path

to place the config in the old location. It took me a while to figure out that it wasn’t taking effect when restarting the webhook because the config file location is hard-coded in the unit file.

It’s a mis-match between the fact there is a config option in r10k, but it doesn’t actually cause the change it looks like it should

Possibly the configuration option should be dropped from

r10k

, or puppet should manage the unit configuration

The latter is probably better, but I'm open to either. I just may not have time in the next few days to work on it.

ewoud: can you recheck https://github.com/voxpupuli/beaker-hostgenerator/pull/321 ?

bastelfreak: I'm glad the reduce duplication part I wrote earlier makes that PR very small

and in ~10 minutes my trains arrives in Karlsruhe so I'll be offline then

ah nice

https://github.com/voxpupuli/beaker-hostgenerator/pull/325 release PR

another release PR https://github.com/voxpupuli/puppet_metadata/pull/99

also ready for review: https://github.com/voxpupuli/voxpupuli-test/pull/115 and https://github.com/voxpupuli/voxpupuli-test/pull/116

it seems puppet-r10k has wrong dependencies set

/opt/puppetlabs/bin/puppet module install \
>       --environment production --modulepath=/tmp/modules \
>       puppet/r10k
Notice: Preparing to install into /tmp/modules ...
Notice: Created target directory /tmp/modules
Notice: Downloading from <https://forgeapi.puppet.com> ...
Notice: Installing -- do not interrupt ...
/tmp/modules
└─┬ puppet-r10k (v12.1.0)
  ├── choria-mcollective (v0.14.3)
  ├── puppet-systemd (v5.2.0)
  ├── puppetlabs-inifile (v6.1.0)
  ├── puppetlabs-stdlib (v8.6.0)
  └── puppetlabs-vcsrepo (v6.1.0)

But, it needs at least v9 of stdlib or it will fail

puppet: Error: Evaluation Error: Unknown function: 'stdlib::to_yaml'. (file: /tmp/modules/r10k/manifests/config.pp, line: 63, column: 16)

See the

puppet-r10k

module at https://forge.puppet.com/puppet/r10k?src=slack&channel=voxpupuli

That's not correct, isn't it?

{
      "name": "puppetlabs/stdlib",
      "version_requirement": ">= 4.19.0 < 10.0.0"
    },

See the

puppetlabs-stdlib

module at https://forge.puppet.com/puppetlabs/stdlib?src=slack&channel=voxpupuli

And it seems choria-mcollective is still bound to stdlib

< 9.0.0

See the

choria-mcollective

module at https://forge.puppet.com/choria/mcollective?src=slack&channel=voxpupuli

Choria releases soon hopefully - been on 3 months sabbatical :)

@vchepkov https://github.com/voxpupuli/puppet-r10k/pull/620

Could someone check these errors in a WIP PR in yum module? They happen in Oracle Linux, and don't seem related to the PR.

that is because of https://groups.io/g/voxpupuli/message/474

@bastelfreak Does that mean that yum module was not supposed to be tested against Oracle Linux? Like: it passed tests before they included Oracle Linux...

Decided to dig into the beast. One of the errors - `expected

File "/tmp/vim-installed".file?

to be truthy, got false` - seems to be caused by

spec/acceptance/post_transaction_actions_spec.rb

which, if I understood correctly, creates the file if package

vim-enhanced

isn't installed. But, in Vagrant box generic/oracle7, which I believe to be a vanilla install, it is indeed installed. From Oracle 7 Puppet 7 and Puppet 8 logs

2) yum::post_transaction_action define simple parameters File "/tmp/vim-installed" is expected to be file
     Failure/Error: it { <http://is_expected.to|is_expected.to> be_file }
       expected `File "/tmp/vim-installed".file?` to be truthy, got false

# Inside VM from Vagrant box generic/oracle7
rpm -q vim-enhanced
vim-enhanced-7.4.629-8.0.1.el7_9.x86_64

# spec/acceptance/post_transaction_actions_spec.rb
describe 'yum::post_transaction_action define' do
  context 'simple parameters' do
    # Using puppet_apply as a helper
    it 'must work idempotently with no errors' do
      pp = <<-EOS
      yum::post_transaction_action{'touch_file':
        key     => 'vim-*',
        command => 'touch /tmp/vim-installed',
      }
      ...
      # Pick a package that is hopefully not installed.         <--- Yes, it is
      package{'vim-enhanced':
        ensure  => 'present',
        require => Yum::Post_transaction_action['touch_file'],  <--- So I guess it doesn't touch /tmp/vim-installed
      }
      EOS
      # Run it twice and test for idempotency
      apply_manifest(pp, catch_failures: true)
      apply_manifest(pp, catch_changes:  true)
    end

    describe file('/tmp/vim-installed') do
      it { <http://is_expected.to|is_expected.to> be_file }                             <--- Then, this fails
    end
  end
end

Is my reasoning correct? Should I file an issue against

puppet-yum

? Could we just change

vim-enhanced

for something else which is sure not to be installed?

<- took a dive. (Karma: -2)