Ignacio Marambio Catán wrote: > On Dec 24, 2007 6:44 PM, David Dyer-Bennet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Normally a "*.d" directory is for package-specific contributions to a >> config file that are all handled together by the configured facility -- >> Linux has logrotate.d for all the log rotating specs from different >> packages, and cron.d for specific cron additions, and so forth. Emacs >> recognizes an emacs.d directory for some startup file things, too. >> >> Solaris has an /etc/cron.d directory, but the files in it aren't crontab >> files, and the man pages don't make any suggestion of anything except >> user-specific cron files (no system cron file, either, that I can >> find). So why the heck is the directory called /etc/cron.d? That's >> just mean; deliberately misleading people! And misusing the naming >> convention. >> >> > > from reading crontab's[1] man page you'll see that in /etc/cron.d you > can place the cron.allow/cron.deny files. > you will also see that the user's crontab files are in > /var/spool/cron/crontabs. > Linux of course works the same way and stores user's crontab files in > the same place (at least slackware does) > what other cron file are you looking for? >
Where do system cron files go? The two places they go on Linux and other systems I've run don't exist on Solaris. Did you understand my point about the normal meaning of "thing.d" directories? That first paragraph you quoted? > [1]:http://compute.cnr.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/man-cgi?crontab+1 > >> (truth time: I'm going to be *so* happy when there's a decent ZFS >> implementation in Linux and I can ditch this archaic pile of kludges.) >> > > solaris is much more than ZFS and the tools are far from archaic > I was a Solaris admin before I ever ran a Linux system, but that was long enough ago I've lost a lot of what I knew then. And what Solaris does now isn't I'm pretty sure what SunOS did back when I knew it (just pre-Solaris if I'm remembering this right). And what I *really* am is a software engineer, so admin stuff was keeping a server working for a development group or such, not my primary role. What happens to me every time I turn around on Solaris these days is that tools I'm used to using are missing key features that I use every day. Tar is missing the 'z' option, date is missing all sorts of options (can't do conversions on dates specified on the command line), touch is missing options I think. And ps has just totally different options, in a different syntax (to get roughly the listing I want every time, I need to type "ps -ef" instead of "ps ax" I think). And when I try to find anything in the documentation, I mostly can't (or they describe three ways of doing things but don't explain why one would choose one over another). And of course there's far, far less information on the web that I can find to help me out when I have these problems. And since Linux is what my work laptop and the systems I'm developing for at work run, that's what keeps being reinforced; I'm currently running Solaris *only* on the file server at home, and I put it there only because I wanted ZFS. For me, I'd be *immensely* better off running Linux with a good ZFS port, if one existed. I probably also wouldn't have had to wait over a year to get all 6 motherboard SATA ports supported, and I *still* haven't dared try again to see if the hot-swap I paid so much for is now actually supported. -- David Dyer-Bennet, [EMAIL PROTECTED]; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
