Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use Python version to determine if base package should be installed #65

Closed
wants to merge 7 commits into from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@elijahandrews
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 15, 2013

Previously we checked the platform version and based our choice on the version of python that ships with those platforms (for example, we knew that CentOS 5 shipped with Python 2.4, so we would install base on that platform)

@elijahandrews

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 16, 2013

@miketheman Looks like the Travis Chef 10 tests fail, but my local kitchen Chef 10 tests pass. Anything I should be worried about?

@miketheman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 16, 2013

We discussed this briefly yesterday - update the apt cookbook constraint to greater than 1.8.2 and less than 2.0.0

@elijahandrews

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 16, 2013

Didn't realize those two issues were related. Will do!

@elijahandrews

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 16, 2013

Interesting:

ERROR: Chef::Exceptions::ObsoleteDependencySyntax: The dependency specification syntax you are using is no longer valid. You may not
specify more than one version constraint for a particular cookbook.

Should we use 1.10.0, which is the latest apt cookbook version that falls between 1.8.2 and 2.0.0?

@miketheman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 16, 2013

So no.
Since this is a public cookbook, we should not impose a given dependency version, rather constrain to working versions.

Less than apt 2.0 is the way to go for now.

@miketheman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 16, 2013

And that also means leaving the log statement in there.

@elijahandrews

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 16, 2013

Reverted previous commit, constrained apt cookbook version to under 2.0.0

it 'enables the datadog-agent service' do
expect(@chef_run).to set_service_to_start_on_boot 'datadog-agent'
end
context 'when using a redhat-family distro above 6.x and installing base' do

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@miketheman

miketheman Jul 16, 2013

Collaborator

This could probably change to be more like a CentOS 5.9, which has python 2.4.3. This is the general use case, and should be reflected in the kitchen.yml config.

before(:all) do
@chef_run = ChefSpec::ChefRunner.new(
:platform => 'centos',
:version => '6.3'

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@miketheman

miketheman Jul 16, 2013

Collaborator

as well as here. Fauxhai has 5.8, not 5.9. https://github.com/customink/fauxhai/blob/master/lib/fauxhai/platforms/centos/5.8.json The differences would be minimal enough for our purposes.

@elijahandrews

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 30, 2013

@miketheman Is this good to merge?

@miketheman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 30, 2013

Probably - I'm holding off merging just yet, since I want to get my release in order and ship what needs to be shipped - I might do a bugfix of the previous one before doing a feature/refactor release.

@elijahandrews

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 30, 2013

Sounds good. Let me know if anything else needs to change.

@ghost ghost assigned miketheman Aug 20, 2013

@miketheman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Aug 20, 2013

I have cherry-picked the first 3 commits, as well as 0bbf134, bypassing the metadata related ones into my release branch.
Woohoo for progress!

@miketheman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Aug 20, 2013

Relevant commits are now on master, closing.

@miketheman miketheman closed this Aug 20, 2013

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.