-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 146
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
gateway_users role not idempotent, rerun of configuration fails #1016
Comments
I had the same issue and have opened a support ticket to Red Hat for this on November 13th, and I was told the bug was reported internally with the engineering team. |
Any update from our RedHat friends? |
I have reopened the case to ask for updates (I had closed it initially when they said they filed an internal jira to fix the issue). the file "plugins/module_utils/aap_module.py" in ansible.platform collection is a copy of "plugins/module_utils/controller_api.py" from awx.awx file (https://github.com/ansible/awx/blob/a74e7301cd224555da3f90c921b82d3964c6731c/awx_collection/plugins/module_utils/controller_api.py#L896) but it's missing the fields_could_be_same method. |
Thnx for the feedback, removing the "update_secrets: false" as a workaround is ok in development. Thanks for the good work. |
This is a module issue and there isn't anything we can do in this collection, I guess I should have made that clear when I put the labels as blocked by module issue |
Summary
When configuring gateway from a user_accounts.yaml file, the first time it runs without any problem.
But when the same file is used to add a user, the playbook fails on exsisting users, it seems that the module is
missing idempotency.
Issue Type
Ansible, Collection, Controller details
OS / ENVIRONMENT
Desired Behavior
The playbook/role should only add the new user and report [ok] when the esisting users are not changed.
Actual Behavior
Please give some details of what is actually happening.
Include a [minimum complete verifiable example] with:
STEPS TO REPRODUCE
create the playbook and the configuration file as shown in this bug report and run this configuration twice against the same installation and it will give the error shown.
The playbook used in the above bug desciption will do the trick
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: