[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nested node attributes not working as expected when using overrides?

["steve ." < >]

(Sorry for the delay, had a few stone-age deployments take up my
list-reading time)

That particular handler only hooks failed runs.  You could either
extend it so that it runs on successful runs as well ... or you could
intentionally write a recipe bogus resource right there at the end of
the run list and intentionally trigger a run failure.  Or write a
failing test if you use chef-minitest-handler...

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Torben Knerr 
<
 >
 wrote:
> Thanks Steve, but this is only for failed runs, is it?
>
> Am 22.10.2012 18:53 schrieb "steve ." 
> <
 >:
>
>> Since failed-run-data.json has it, you could probably write a really
>> simple Chef handler to dump/deliver node data...
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Torben Knerr 
>> <
 >
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > Am 19.10.2012 17:36 schrieb "Daniel DeLeo" 
>> > <
 >:
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Friday, October 19, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Bryan Baugher wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I looked and didn't find anything. I have been using nested attributes
>> >>> for quite some time and haven't had any issues using them in recipes.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Torben Knerr 
>> >>> <
 >
>> >>>  wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Waah, really? I hoped I did something wrong. Wouldn't that violate
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> principle of least surprise? Or is it just me who is "surprised" by
>> >>>> that...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Btw: I'm seeing this pattern in lots of recipes, guess this would be
>> >>>> a
>> >>>> surprise to some of the authors as well.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Is this documented anywhere in the Wiki?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Currently, precedence within an attribute level is implemented by order
>> >> of
>> >> application. This means that the only safe time to generate a computed
>> >> value
>> >> is in a recipe, since attributes from roles will not have been applied
>> >> until
>> >> later.
>> >>
>> >> We recently fixed a different but related issue, CHEF-1804[0] with an
>> >> eye
>> >> towards making this issue (CHEF-2936[1]) easier to resolve; it should
>> >> be
>> >> fixed in master in the next couple of weeks. Note that these are
>> >> potentially
>> >> breaking changes so they will go in Chef 11.0 but not 10.x.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Daniel DeLeo
>> >>
>> >> 0. http://tickets.opscode.com/browse/CHEF-1804
>> >> 1. http://tickets.opscode.com/browse/CHEF-2936
>> >
>> > Ah, thanks! CHEF-2936 is exactly what hits me. CHEF-1804 is weird as
>> > well,
>> > I'll try to keep that in the back of my head...
>> >
>> > As this behaviour is quite counter-intuitive, would you agree that a
>> > foodcritic rule would make sense here?
>> >
>> > And a side question: what's the way to dump a node's "resolved"
>> > attributes?
>> > Is it possible via knife? I'm currently doing it via shef on the node...
>> >
>> > Cheers, Torben