[TALK] Why you did'nt use the states firewalld ?

[ArthurREGNARD]

I would like to know why you did'nt use the firewalld Modules and States?

For exemple your doing in the init.sls file:

reload_firewalld:
  cmd.wait:
    - name: 'firewall-cmd --reload'
    - require:
      - service: service_firewalld

But the Modules do the same things:

reload_firewalld:
  modules.wait:
    - name: firewalld.reload_rules
    - require:
      - service: service_firewalld

Why you don't use the states firewalld.present ? This states reload firewalld if something changed.

[myii]

@ArthurREGNARD Thanks for raising this issue. If you look at the blame, you can see that this section was added to the formula almost 3 years ago:

• https://github.com/saltstack-formulas/firewalld-formula/blame/49377870380d327039e0e2fb0e8c6f3aba08b775/firewalld/init.sls#L49-L51
  • I'm not sure @amendlik is around to give more info.

However, if you're willing to provide a PR, we can test if it does the job. We have Kitchen, Travis and InSpec set up for this formula, so I'm sure we can confirm things are working as necessary.

---

Linking to the state that you've mentioned:

• https://docs.saltstack.com/en/latest/ref/states/all/salt.states.firewalld.html#salt.states.firewalld.present

[amendlik]

Looking at the dates, the systemd.reload_rules was not present until v2016.11 (released in November 2016), and this change to the systemd formula was made in March 2017. I probably just didn't have the very latest version of Salt when I created PR #10.

Moving to the module execution, rather than the command, seems like a good move to me.

[myii]

@amendlik Thanks for the feedback, that's appreciated.

[aboe76]

@ArthurREGNARD you are correct with the reload module

The saltstack firewalld states are a bit different.
Sometimes they are a bit behind the curve, and provide fewer options.