Support specifying remote source for ThinLinc server bundle

[eoli3n]

We use ansible-pull on our agents. The tasks "Installing ThinLinc packages" use unarchive module.
Unarchive module defaultly assumes that the archive file is on the controller, but as ansible-pull runs ansible directly from clients, I provide that file directly with NFS on all hosts.
I needed to add remote_src: yes, which let me use ansible-pull and ansible "push" in the same way.
And to configure thinlinc_bundle_path with the full path from clients view.

thinlinc_bundle_path: "/srv/nfs/installers/tl-{{ thinlinc_version }}-server.zip"

- name: Installing ThinLinc packages
  block:
    - name: Unpacking ThinLinc server bundle
      unarchive:
        src: "{{ thinlinc_bundle_path }}"
        dest: /root
        creates: "/root/tl-{{ thinlinc_version }}-server"
        remote_src: yes

[aeneby]

I don't quite understand why remote_src: false wouldn't work with ansible-pull. I will have to do some testing. But yes, I agree it would be nice if the role worked with ansible-pull as well. Thanks!

[eoli3n]

I just read my issue again, I can't make it clearer, it's crystal :)

[aeneby]

No I understand your description perfectly, I'm just not sure why the unarchive module would behave differently between push and pull operations. Will need to investigate.

[eoli3n]

That's what I tried to explain here:

Unarchive module defaultly assumes that the archive file is on the controller, but as ansible-pull runs ansible directly from clients, I provide that file directly with NFS on all hosts.

Unarchive module defaultly assumes that the archive file is on the controller, not in the repository, it doesn't copy the archive on the client automagically before extracting it, it reads it from the controller.
Ansible-pull cannot then find the file. You could put the file in the repository and set the full path of the file from the client context, but you cannot use the same playbook in push mode then, because that exact path doesn't exist on the controller. It also would force you to copy the bundle on the controller AND on the client manually, at the exact same path.
remote_src let unarchive module to assume that the file is on the client, not the controller, which is then the same path from ansible-pull context or ansible in push mode context.

Case without remote_src:
On the server: /data/installer-bundle

• push mode : ansible assume that the file in on the controller, it finds /data/installer-bundle and extract data on the client
• pull mode : ansible assume that the file in on the controller, which is itself, /data/installer-bundle doesn't exist on the client.

Case with remote_src and NFS:
On the client : /mnt/nfs/installer-bundle

• push mode : ansible assume that the file is on the client, it finds /mnt/nfs/installer-bundle and extract data on the client
• pull mode : ansible assume that the file in on the client, which is itself, it also finds /mnt/nfs/installer-bundle and extract data on the client

[aeneby]

What I don't understand is why ansible-pull requires remote_src: true when the bundle is available on the controller, in your case via NFS.

[eoli3n]

ansible-pull doesn't require remote_src. But if you don't use remote_src, then you will not be able to use push mode with the exact same playbook, because push mode assume that the file in on the controller.
I use push AND pull mode with the exact same playbook.
When I commit a change, I use push mode with --tags on the role to quickly trigger the modification on hosts.
If a host is down, he will use ansible-pull with a service at startup to get the modificaiton.

[aeneby]

Okay, understood. I guess the general requirement then is for the Ansible role to support both local and remote sources for the server bundle. Perhaps this could be implemented as a variable.