[chef-dev] Re: bug: 'notifies' ran even when bash script didn't run when 'creates' presents

[Adam Jacob < >]

Yeah, we should fix it.  Not for nothing, but I feel bad about creates
existing at all - we added it to the API before we added meta not_if and
only_if, and it mimics the puppet file API. I would be +1 on deprecating a
special cased not_if.



On 12/7/12 2:36 PM, "Nuo Yan" 
<
 >
 wrote:

>
>
>
>We found that it started to happen recently (but we are not 100% sure if
>it happened before) that when using the 'bash' resource, 'notifies' gets
>executed even when the script didn't run because of what's specified in
>"creates" already exists.
>
>
>For example, for this block in the nginx::source recipe:
>
>
>bash "compile_nginx_source" do
>  cwd Chef::Config[:file_cache_path]
>  code <<-EOH
>    tar zxf nginx-#{nginx_version}.tar.gz
>    cd nginx-#{nginx_version} && ./configure #{configure_flags}
>    make && make install
>  EOH
>  creates node[:nginx][:src_binary]
>  notifies :restart, "service[nginx]"
>end
>
>
>
>
>If the file referred in node[:nginx][:src_binary] exists, it doesn't run
>the script to compile nginx, which is right, but it still executes the
>notification which restarts nginx, which is not cool.
>
>
>We worked around this easily by putting a not_if block in it, but we
>think this is a chef bug that should be fixed (we are on 10.16.0 and
>10.16.2). We think whether or not "notifies" get triggered should be
>consistent with whether the code(script) ran.
> If 'creates' presents and the code may not run in some conditions, then
>in those conditions 'notifies' shouldn't get triggered by default. This
>nginx example is an example of the use case, if it's already compiled,
>there is no reason to restart it. I try to
> think about other use cases and it seems to me that in very rare cases
>you want 'notifies' to trigger even when anything else is not executed.
>As the result I think at least the default should be the common case,
>where "notifies" doesn't trigger if "creates"
> presents and when the code did not run because of being protected by
>"creates."
>
>
>Let me know what you think.
>
>
>Thanks,
>Nuo
>  
>
>