Different behavior of path resolving in lookup function in 1.5.3 and 1.5.4

Archives Ansible Project
1

Hello,

I have a problem after migration from 1.5.3 to 1.5.4

My ansible directory is structured according to recommendations in Best Practices doc.
It is stored in /vagrant/ansible

/vagrant/ansible/group_vars/all contains directives like

fileshare_username: foo fileshare_password: "{{ lookup('file', '../../../credentials/common/ldap/' + fileshare_username) }}"

Password is stored in /vagrant/ansible/credentials/common/ldap/foo

/vagrant/ansible/roles/app/tasks/main.yml contains task that uses these credentials:

  • name: copy smb credentials for the user
    sudo: yes
    sudo_user: “{{ cli_user }}”
    template: src=.smbcredentials.j2 dest=~/.smbcredentials mode=0600
    with_items:
  • {username: “{{ fileshare_username }}”, password: “{{ fileshare_password }}”}

I execute Ansible from /vagrant/ansible directory.

After upgrade to 1.5.4 I receive the following message:

/credentials/common/ldap/foo does not exist

It means that now Ansible resolves this path from the current directory, while earlier it resolved this path from the base directory of /vagrant/ansible/roles/app/tasks/main.yml file.
If I change fileshare_password value to “{{ lookup(‘file’, ‘credentials/common/ldap/’ + fileshare_username) }}” or “{{ lookup(‘file’, ‘./credentials/common/ldap/’ + fileshare_username) }}” then it starts looking for the /vagrant/ansible/roles/app/files/credentials/common/ldap/foo file. Changing value to “{{ lookup(‘file’, ‘./…/…/…/credentials/common/ldap/’ + fileshare_username) }}” don’t help (it falls to /credentials).

I’m using self-compiled deb packages for Debian 7 without any modifications (git clone && git checkout v1.5.4 && make deb).

I haven’t posted issue on github because I’m not sure if it’s an issue.

Thanks in advance.

2

Ansible is now evaluating some things earlier, though it may need to be told to not evaluate lookup plugins at that stage.

Please file a ticket on github with steps to reproduce if you haven’t done so already.

Thanks!

3

Thank you Michael!

I’ll try to create a snippet with a minimal code necessary to reproduce the issue.
Then I’ll post it to the github.