coderanger: the reason i went to UI was because knife configure --initial was giving me trouble
ERROR: Chef::Exceptions::ValidationFailed: Option admin must be a kind of [TrueClass, FalseClass]! You passed "https://example.com/users/admin".
mikexstudios
@coderanger: well, but data bags can be encrypted and moving things to a data bag is a good practice for if I upgrade from chef-solo.
rickmanelius has quit
crazysix has quit
vigith
nm.. i got the fix.. i had to give url has https://
garrypolley has quit
thun_ has quit
zanshin joined the channel
MrBIOS has quit
zanshin has quit
dbodner has quit
alunduil joined the channel
coderanger
mikexstudios: encrypted data bags with solo are almost certainly not what you want to be using
mikexstudios: Check out the citadel cookbook and chef-vault
mikexstudios: With solo, even that is probably pushing it though
blarghmatey has quit
mikexstudios
coderanger: Thanks for the suggestions. I was just reading up on chef-vault.
ranjib has quit
coderanger
mikexstudios: Basically think very carefully about what security assertions you are making and why, knee jerk "we need encryption" is sometimes counter productive :)
dbodner joined the channel
For example, if the git repo isn't public, and you are using something like knife solo, encryption is mostly moot since the only place your data lives is either on your workstation (presumed safe) or the target server (which you just gave the decryption key)
mikexstudios
coderanger: Right. I was thinking about possibly making my git repo public in the future, which is why I considered encryption despite using chef-solo at the moment.
But even then, I should probably just not check any data in the git repo in the first place.
coderanger
mikexstudios: So in that case, think about how you are going to store and manage your decryption keys, and if you can just distribute secret data that way and skip the encryption
MattMake_ has quit
mikexstudios
coderanger: Thanks. I'll re-think my strategy.
MattMaker joined the channel
coderanger
:-) Its a Very Hard Thing to get right
citadel is nice, but only works if you are 100% amazon kool aid
beyond that, just cross your fingers for barbican or something similar
jmickle has quit
MrBIOS joined the channel
rm_ has quit
rm_ joined the channel
Nick1_ has quit
yuri1 joined the channel
rm_ has quit
yuri1 has quit
quattro_ has quit
cyberswat has quit
mconigliaro has quit
mikexstudios has left the channel
mconigliaro joined the channel
jstump has quit
halfamind joined the channel
tlr00 has quit
alexbst has quit
tlr00 joined the channel
alexbst joined the channel
JayF
What's the appropriate way to compare ubuntu versions? for example, node['platform_version
tplaner has quit
What's the appropriate way to compare ubuntu versions? for example, node['platform_version'] appears to return a string ("12.04") but I want to do a comparison to it (i.e. <13.10, do this, else do this)
tlr00 has quit
mconigliaro has quit
coderanger
JayF: The usual trick is to use Gem::Version
JayF
I don't understand what you mean
coderanger
which implements major/minor/rev/etc comparison logic
JayF
ah
but I'd have to import all of rubygems to get that
coderanger
if Gem::Version.new(node['platform_verison']) > Gem::Version.new('whatever')
Rubygems is always loaded
Thats how Ruby packaging works in the first place
halfamind has quit
JayF
sweet, that appears to do exactly what I wanted
Thanks a bunch!
Guest48470 has quit
ericReeves has left the channel
MrBIOS has quit
jmickle has quit
halfamind joined the channel
j^2 has quit
Xeron has quit
alisdair joined the channel
ryker has quit
halfamind has quit
rm_ joined the channel
halfamind joined the channel
halfamind has quit
MrBIOS joined the channel
zanshin joined the channel
palms has quit
halfamind joined the channel
jjj_ has quit
jjj_ joined the channel
hasp-air joined the channel
zanshin has quit
damian joined the channel
damian is now known as Guest72568
rm_ has quit
rm_ joined the channel
jjj_ has quit
caryp has quit
valerienc joined the channel
Guest72568 has quit
freerobby has quit
jmickle joined the channel
valerienc has quit
justizin has quit
dbodner has quit
MrBIOS has quit
carmstrong has quit
dbodner joined the channel
justizin joined the channel
magoo has quit
valerienc joined the channel
valerienc has quit
valerienc joined the channel
jmickle has quit
junk has quit
eponymi joined the channel
justizin has quit
pravka_ has quit
mdpatrick
Hey guys I'm trying to run bootstrap on an existing node, and it keeps running an old version of one of my recipes! My depends line does NOT state a version. Once I deleted the old recipe off my hosted chef entirely it began to just throw an error saying the recipe doesn't exist at all (which is incorrect, I just deleted old version). Is there somewhere that recipe version is set OTHER THAN metadata.rb???????
valerienc has quit
coderanger
mdpatrick: check the environment for a version constraint, or other cookbooks that depend on it
justizin joined the channel
justizin has quit
Demeisen joined the channel
pravka joined the channel
rm_ has quit
rm_ joined the channel
rm_ has quit
rm_ joined the channel
freerobby joined the channel
halfamind has quit
tobin joined the channel
alunduil has quit
freerobby has quit
zanshin joined the channel
MrBIOS joined the channel
tkuchiki joined the channel
tobin has quit
zanshin has quit
halfamind joined the channel
rm_ has quit
rm_ joined the channel
mdpatrick
coderanger: Environment just says _default on opscode. there is a cookbook depending on it, but no version specified on depends line
rm__ joined the channel
alunduil joined the channel
eponymi has quit
rm_ has quit
MrBIOS has quit
coderanger
mdpatrick: Also check all other cookbooks depending on it, and look in your run lists for a [email protected] yntax