[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Order of Execution
From: |
Ed Brown |
Subject: |
Re: Order of Execution |
Date: |
Wed, 05 Jan 2005 11:12:16 -0700 |
On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 06:34, Christian Pearce wrote:
> cfagent.conf
> control:
> actionsequence = ( copy shellcommands shellcommands.secondrun )
In my experience, if you qualify any action, you had better qualify them
all. The above is misleading in that if you move the unqualified
'shellcommands' after 'shellcommands.secondrun' it does not change the
actionsequence. In other words, this does not work:
actionsequence = ( shellcommands.firstrun shellcommands )
Also, the only way I know of to be certain about actionsequence (haven't
used methods for this) is to only define it in cfagent.conf. Brendan's
use of unqualified actions in the top-level actionsequnce (cfagent.conf)
and qualified actions in included actionsequences could be useful in
certain situations, ie, when you don't want to do something FIRST in the
included sequence, and when you don't have more than one included,
qualified action (or don't care about the order of included, qualified
actions, as long as they happen after unqualified (or 'any::') actions).
-Ed
- Order of Execution, Brian E. Seppanen, 2005/01/05
- Re: Order of Execution, Pau Capdevila/Upcnet, 2005/01/05
- Re: Order of Execution, Brendan Strejcek, 2005/01/05
- Re: Order of Execution, Christian Pearce, 2005/01/05
- Actionsequence as a top level section, Chip Seraphine, 2005/01/05
- actionsequence suggestion, Ed Brown, 2005/01/06
- Re: actionsequence suggestion, Mark . Burgess, 2005/01/06
- Re: actionsequence suggestion, Tim Nelson, 2005/01/10
- Re: actionsequence suggestion, Brendan Strejcek, 2005/01/10