Re: editfiles missing the profound function?

[Yaroslav Halchenko]

damn me - I should probably RTFM once again.
I've checked and indeed DefineClass is caused on per file basis not on
per-rule basis. What I mean is that if for the same file I have two
rules setup because there are different classes

class1::
{ FILE
   modifications1
  DefineClass c1
  }

class2::
{ FILE
   modifications2
  DefineClass c2
  }

then even if modifications1 are not done, it defines c1 if
modifications2 were done... aaaa - that sounds "not good". It seems to
be not that crucial but can have sideeffects I would say.

Indeed your double-command should be fine under current cfengine :-)

On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 11:28:58AM -0600, Brendan Strejcek wrote:
> lists@onerussian.com wrote:
> I don't understand. What do you mean by "action associated with" ? If
> you are using DefineClasses to trigger another action, it will work just
> fine. The class will be defined if the file is changed. Or are you using
> RunScript?

-- 
Yaroslav Halchenko
Research Assistant, Psychology Department, Rutgers-Newark
Office: (973) 353-5440x263 | FWD: 82823 | Fax: (973) 353-1171
Student  Ph.D. @ CS Dept. NJIT, Master @ CS Dept. UNM