This repository has been archived by the owner on May 1, 2024. It is now read-only.
Add support for new provisioning tools #37
Labels
Comments
|
I would differentiate and prioritize shell provisioning, since its likely the easiest one and in practice with a shell provisioner one can run almost any other provisioner. |
|
Hey, this may be a noob question but how can I have lxdock run a simple bash script upon provision? Thank you. |
|
@jaylenw I'm glad you asked! it's a new feature of the newly-released v0.2 :) See https://lxdock.readthedocs.io/en/stable/provisioners/shell.html |
|
@hsoft Cool! thank you! |
ghost
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 16, 2017
Other changes:
1. Add lxdock.conf.schema.get_schema() for testing purposes.
2. Improve the autodiscovery of provisioner schemas:
(1) support composite voluptuous schema (Any, All, ...);
(2) prevent "fall-through" error message when the provisioner schema is not satisfied:
Previously, if the target schema (uniquely determined by "type") is not satisfied,
the config will continue to be compared with remaining schemas and eventually LXDock
throws an error message that is totally unrelated to target schema (because of Any).
3. Do the bare bone setups for the provisioners before calling any .provision() method, to prevent
package clashing if the user defines other provisioners that prepare required packages for a
later provisioner. Let's ensure that user-defined operations always override LXDock's default.
4. Add `apt-get update` in DebianGuest.install_packages before running `apt-get install`.
Thanks hsoft and ganto for reviewing.
|
@ellmetha you could remove "puppet" from the list now, thanks to @lingxiaoyang 👍 |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: