Support for portage sets about puppet-portage HOT 6 CLOSED

Hi. Not sure what you're asking for. You can create a set in /etc/portage/sets with the file built-in class of puppet, and you can emerge them using either exec or portage::package. Am I missing something here?

from puppet-portage.

I believe you are mistaken about using portage::package, it rejects them due to them as being in the wrong format.

testsrv ~ # puppet agent --test
err: Failed to apply catalog: Parameter name failed on Package_use[vim-set]: name must be a properly formatted atom, see portage(5) for more information at /etc/puppet/modules/test/manifests/packages.pp:29

portage/lib/puppet/util/portage.rb's valid_package function matches all names against a regex to check that they are in the format of 'category/package' so using the format of '@set' fails.

However changing this regex alone will solve the issue since after that the package name will be rejected by puppet's built in portage provider since it relies on eix lookups to check if a packages is installed.

From my point of view to achieve this either puppet's portage provider needs to be patched to support sets or we need to create a custom type/provider.

from puppet-portage.

Indeed I was mistaken, sorry for that. My opinion is:

1. We should file a bug upstream about lack of @set format support ( @p8952 wanna handle that?)
2. We don't need a type/provider in this module for sets, since sets can be created with the file class, and can be installed normally (assuming 1 is fixed)
3. Upstream portage provider shouldn't have extra checks for package format, portage itself has those checks and I don't see the benefit of adding more. It could just read the errors from portage and act accordingly

@adrienthebo opinions please?

from puppet-portage.

If possible it would be great to have this supported in the upstream provider, however if @puppetlabs would prefer not to include this functionality I have sent a Pull Request containing a type and provider to install, upgrade, and remove portage sets.

from puppet-portage.

With respect to input validation, the important detail is to make sure that errors are clearly reported. If portage can hand over the correct information to Puppet then that's perfect, and if not then the provider itself should do validation so that if the input is bad the user knows what went wrong, why, and how to fix it.

from puppet-portage.

we can continue the discussion in #70, closing as duplicate

from puppet-portage.