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

Unexpected Corrective Changes #70

Open
msmost opened this issue Nov 20, 2019 · 1 comment
Open

Unexpected Corrective Changes #70

msmost opened this issue Nov 20, 2019 · 1 comment

Comments

@msmost
Copy link

msmost commented Nov 20, 2019

Affected Puppet, Ruby, OS and module versions/distributions

  • Puppet: 6.4.4
  • Ruby: 2.5.3
  • Distribution: RHEL 7
  • Module version: 1.0.0

How to reproduce (e.g Puppet code you use)

I'm trying to ensure a subset of ACLs on a file using the set command. Here's an example of what I'm doing.

file { "/some/example_dir":
   ensure => directory,
   group  => $owning_group,
   mode   => '0770',
} ->
posix_acl { "/some/example_dir":
   action     => set,
   provider   => posixacl,
   permission => ["group:${co_owning_group}:r-x",'user:${special_user}:r-x'],
   recursive  => false,
}

What are you seeing

I get a continuous corrective change that says the permissions will be changed from:
"group::rwx", "group:co_owning_group:r-x", "mask::rwx", "other::---", "user::rwx", "user:special_user:r-x"
to
"group:co_owning_group:r-x", "user:special_user:r-x"

What behavior did you expect instead

I would expect that the ACLs would be overlayed, and further runs would not produce a need for puppet to do a corrective change.

This is the way the module functioned under release 0.1.1. It would simply overlay the permissions and any existing permissions would not be taken into consideration. This seems to be inline with the description of how the set function is supposed to work (as opposed to the exact function.)

Any additional information you'd like to impart

This issue seems to be slightly different from the one opened by @Bouke

I'm perfectly fine with the way the permissions are getting set. It just seems to be a slight issue with the Puppet logic that evaluates whether or not a corrective changes is needed.

@matt-matt2
Copy link

I think they are the same issue as reported by @Bouke, and I've commented the same in that issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants