Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am testing a puppet init.pp file (on windows) that looks something like:

class myclass {    
 package { 'java':
    ensure => installed,
    provider => 'msi',
    source => 'S:\puppet-repo\jdk1.6.0_31.msi',
    install_options => { 'INSTALLDIR' => 'C:\tools\java' },

Then my site.pp file looks like:

node default {
  include myclass

I created a tests/init.pp file that just calls the myclass module:

class { 'myclass': }

I can run the tests/init.pp file and it does install java correctly. I was wondering if there is a way to just run the myclass module from the command line without creating a separate tests/init.pp file. Or maybe I could move the package statement in myclass to its own .pp file and include that in init.pp and then I could run that separate .pp file if I wanted to. What is the more correct way to do this?

share|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

First, a trick for verifying syntax if you don't already know:

puppet parser validate my_file.pp

Now, how you approach spot-testing a new class can vary based on your deployment but I can tell you how I do it, and perhaps it will make sense in your case. Or perhaps everyone on ServerFault will tell me how wrong I am.

In any given environment I have a set of node declarations using inheritance:

node base_production_environment {
  include ssh
  include ntp
  include whatever_else

node /prod-app\d+\.mycompany\.com/ inherits base_production_environment { }

Now, when I write a new class, I want to test it on a particular system first before rolling it out, so I add a more specific (by hostname) node declaration so that it will override the less specific (by regular expression) declaration, like so:

node '' inherits base_production_environment {
  include my_new_class

I simplified this a lot to highlight using specific node declarations for spot-checking new classes. We also use environments to roll out changes to less critical environments prior to rolling them out to production, etc.

So I just re-read your question and it occurred to me that you may be using a pushed modules directory approach, rather than using a puppetmaster. If that's true, you can include a class for testing purposes with something like:

puppet apply --modulepath=C:\puppet-modules\ -e "include my_class"

I don't know if that's the correct directory syntax for puppet under Windows, though.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for this input. The pushed directory approach is more what I'm working with. That helps. Thanks. – Jeff Storey Feb 22 '12 at 5:43

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.