On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David C. Rankin
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote:
On 04/06/2011 10:34 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Upstream stability makes sense. If redhat is behind cronie, then that
seems like the logical choice.
Why is this logical? Is it the developer what makes a
On 21.04.2011 08:32, Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David C. Rankin
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote:
On 04/06/2011 10:34 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Upstream stability makes sense. If redhat is behind cronie, then that
seems like the logical choice.
Why is this
Kaiting Chen wrote:
So what's the status here? I pulled cronie into [community-testing] a couple
of days ago and will probably merge it into [community] soon. So that's the
one I vote.
But regardless of which one we choose in my opinion the sooner we get rid of
dcron the better. --Kaiting.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 02:32:42AM -0400, Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David C. Rankin
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote:
On 04/06/2011 10:34 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Upstream stability makes sense. If redhat is behind cronie, then that
seems like the
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com:
I second this suggestion. cronie upstream isn't dead at all. cronie
is a drop-in unlike fcron which was favored earlier.
Is it such a drop-in like the new dcron when dcron upstream was adopted
by this Arch user?
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:18:33 +0200
schrieb Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de:
I can be wrong, but I really have the feeling that switching the
default cron daemon to cronie will be a big mistake.
And, btw., what's about the licenses? fcron is GPL, cronie has a custom
license called ISC. I
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:27:07 +0200, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:18:33 +0200 schrieb Heiko Baums
li...@baums-on-web.de:
And, btw., what's about the licenses? fcron is GPL, cronie has a
custom
license called ISC. I don't know this ISC but this should be checked
before.
On Thursday, April 21, 2011 01:48:04 Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 21.04.2011 08:32, Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David C. Rankin
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote:
On 04/06/2011 10:34 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Upstream stability makes sense. If redhat is behind
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Yaro Kasear y...@marupa.net wrote:
On Thursday, April 21, 2011 01:48:04 Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 21.04.2011 08:32, Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David C. Rankin
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote:
On 04/06/2011 10:34
Yaro Kasear wrote:
I'm still trying to understand WHY we suddenly feel the need to replace dcron
when its not even broken. Replacing packages with other packages purely
because they're new is something Fedora and Ubuntu would do, I though Arch
wasn't about arbitrarily replacing its
I'm still trying to understand WHY we suddenly feel the need to replace dcron
when its not even broken.
Actually dcron is broken quite badly. Sometimes the cron job is run
several times in a row, sometimes it's not run at all. The dcron
developer said he will fix it soon, but it was about a
On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haases...@lutzhaase.com:
I second this suggestion. cronie upstream isn't dead at all. cronie
is a drop-in unlike fcron which was favored earlier.
Is it such a drop-in like the new dcron when
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haases...@lutzhaase.com:
I second this suggestion. cronie upstream isn't dead at all. cronie
is a drop-in unlike fcron
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote:
Only new installations will get cronie by default instead of dcron.
+1 from me for replacing dcron like this, but with fcron, not cronie.
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haases...@lutzhaase.com:
I second this suggestion. cronie upstream isn't dead at all. cronie
is a drop-in unlike fcron which was favored earlier.
Is it such a drop-in like
On 04/22/2011 12:11 AM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haases...@lutzhaase.com:
I second this suggestion. cronie upstream isn't dead at all. cronie
is a drop-in unlike fcron which
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/22/2011 12:11 AM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haases...@lutzhaase.com:
I second this suggestion. cronie upstream isn't dead at all. cronie
is a drop-in
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Because of these:
https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?string=dcronproject=1
Mostly https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18681
The run many times per day bug hasn't bitten me since months ago. And I
used to see it really often. Maybe it is fixed?
On Apr 21, 2011, at 17:30, Grigorios Bouzakis grb...@xsmail.com wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/22/2011 12:11 AM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haases...@lutzhaase.com:
I
On 22/04/11 00:30, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
if this will happen, the steps are very simple
1) remove dcron from core
2) add cronie/fcron to core in base group and depending on the package,
it might have conflicts=dcron but not replaces
this way the existent systems will
Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Apr 21, 2011, at 17:30, Grigorios Bouzakis grb...@xsmail.com wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/22/2011 12:11 AM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik
Evangelos Foutras wrote:
On 22/04/11 00:30, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
if this will happen, the steps are very simple
1) remove dcron from core
2) add cronie/fcron to core in base group and depending on the package,
it might have conflicts=dcron but not replaces
this way
On 22/04/11 10:18, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
An unsupported package installed by the official installation media.
Like i said it doesnt make sense to me. But you got a plan. So just go
with it. And hopefully there'll never be another debate about cron
around here in the future.
There is
Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:33:57 +0300
schrieb Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org:
i think you are not understanding the process.
if cronie is moved in core, it won't have a replaces=dcron. Only new
installations will get cronie by default instead of dcron.
I understand this exactly. But I still
Dimitrios Apostolou [2011.04.22 0126 +0300]:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Because of these:
https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?string=dcronproject=1
Mostly https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18681
The run many times per day bug hasn't bitten me since months ago.
And I used
On Thu 21 Apr 2011 10:46 +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 02:32:42AM -0400, Kaiting Chen wrote:
So what's the status here? I pulled cronie into [community-testing]
a couple of days ago and will probably merge it into [community]
soon. So that's the one I vote.
But
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:16:46 +0200
Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
On the other hand this issue could be solved in a different way
without any further discussions. There's a need for installing one
cron daemon, but no need for a default cron daemon. It's pretty the
same issue as with
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Dieter Plaetinck die...@plaetinck.bewrote:
On the other hand this issue could be solved in a different way
without any further discussions. There's a need for installing one
cron daemon, but no need for a default cron daemon. It's pretty the
same issue as
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 06:45:29 -0400
Kaiting Chen kaitocr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Dieter Plaetinck
die...@plaetinck.bewrote:
On the other hand this issue could be solved in a different way
without any further discussions. There's a need for installing one
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Dieter Plaetinck die...@plaetinck.bewrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 06:45:29 -0400
Kaiting Chen kaitocr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Dieter Plaetinck
die...@plaetinck.bewrote:
On the other hand this issue could be solved in a different
On 08/04/11 07:16, Heiko Baums wrote:
But let's try to get objective again.
No need. A new cron for [core] has to pass only one condition... :)
1) a developer is willing to maintain it.
So far that seems to be Thomas and fcron.
Anyway, I recall mention in our bug report of a patch being
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 1:33 AM, Dieter Plaetinck die...@plaetinck.bewrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:16:46 +0200
Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
On the other hand this issue could be solved in a different way
without any further discussions. There's a need for installing one
cron
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 08/04/11 07:16, Heiko Baums wrote:
But let's try to get objective again.
No need. A new cron for [core] has to pass only one condition... :)
1) a developer is willing to maintain it.
So far that seems to be
On 04/06/2011 10:34 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Upstream stability makes sense. If redhat is behind cronie, then that
seems like the logical choice.
Why is this logical? Is it the developer what makes a software good or
is it the features and the stability? If Redhat's cronie has less
features
Am 07.04.2011 04:30, schrieb Thomas S Hatch:
Right, both are viable choices, btw I will be migrating my datacenters away
from dcron in the near future and doing a series of tests on cronie and
fcron, I will post my findings to the list.
I think that will be more valuable than any continuation
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 22:03:23 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
I would say that we should consider compatibility with vixie cron
syntax - this is and has been the expected syntax for the default
cron daemon for a LONG time and avoids hindering Arch Linux adoption.
Why do you
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 20:30:46 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
Right, both are viable choices, btw I will be migrating my
datacenters away from dcron in the near future and doing a series of
tests on cronie and fcron, I will post my findings to the list.
Data center? So the
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org wrote:
Am 07.04.2011 04:30, schrieb Thomas S Hatch:
Right, both are viable choices, btw I will be migrating my datacenters
away
from dcron in the near future and doing a series of tests on cronie and
fcron, I will post my
On Wednesday, April 06, 2011 15:27:27 Thomas Bächler wrote:
Am 05.04.2011 09:19, schrieb Thomas S Hatch:
I can think of three considerations for a cron daemon:
1 . Minimal - its a cron daemon, it does not need to be complex
2. Active development
3. Anacron functionality
As far as I
On Thursday 07 of April 2011 12:32:50 Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 22:03:23 -0600
I spent quite some time as a trainer for Red Hat and taught classes on
SELinux.
Is this why you want to push cronie so heavily?
Heiko
Sorry to sound rude, but Heiko, it's you who is pushing fcron
Am Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:53:58 +0200
schrieb Marek Otahal markota...@gmail.com:
Sorry to sound rude, but Heiko, it's you who is pushing fcron so
unhealthily heavily. I wouldn't have no opinion on the two crons but
after reading the discussion I'd stick to cronie. Just my 2c.
Well, on the one
Am Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:16:46 +0200
schrieb Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de:
But let's try to get objective again.
Btw., generally it doesn't really matter that much which cron daemon is
installed by AIF. Another cron daemon can easily be installed
afterwards. A cron daemon is not such an
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Why do you need vixie cron syntax? Can't you migrate once to a new
syntax? Btw., most of fcron's syntax is the same as the syntax of every
cron daemon. You can easily take your previous crontabs. You probably
have only
On 08.04.2011 00:15, Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Why do you need vixie cron syntax? Can't you migrate once to a new
syntax? Btw., most of fcron's syntax is the same as the syntax of every
cron daemon. You can easily take your
cronie also appears to be the nicest migration choice for users who are
not used to fcron. It seems to support anachron features, cron.d,
daily/weekly/etc, is able to actually keep time and works just like
expected whereas fcron has fcrontab with a slightly different syntax. We
could actually
Kaiting Chen wrote:
The thing is that cronie is forked from vixie-cron which is much older than
fcron. And I would venture to say that vixie-cron or some derivative is the
default crond for the vast majority of distributions out there. --Kaiting.
Why do you have --disable-anacron in the
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:34:42 +0200 Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
cronie also appears to be the nicest migration choice for users who
are not used to fcron. It seems to support anachron features, cron.d,
daily/weekly/etc, is able to actually keep time and works just like
expected whereas fcron has
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 08:41:13AM +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
packages we know are broken by putting them into the base group. Perhaps
fcron is a fine choice.
Bug report for reference: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18681
It surely would be great for fcron to replace dcron, since
fcron is pretty much the de facto cron of choice for anyone needing a cron
without special case needs. A nice general cron program.
I do wonder about the bureaucratic processes in place to facillitate such a
switch, though.
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Corey Johns li...@n-co.de wrote:
fcron is pretty much the de facto cron of choice for anyone needing a cron
without special case needs. A nice general cron program.
I do wonder about the bureaucratic processes in place to facillitate such a
switch, though.
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 10:24:42 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
The thing to do is contact the package maintainer and present the
idea, and ask what needs to be done to make the change.
I for one +1 to the move, I like dcron, but when it takes this long
to fix bugs upstream we
Am 05.04.2011 09:19, schrieb Thomas S Hatch:
I can think of three considerations for a cron daemon:
1 . Minimal - its a cron daemon, it does not need to be complex
2. Active development
3. Anacron functionality
As far as I can see this leaves us with fcron, dcron and cronie. Cronie
Am Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:27:27 +0200
schrieb Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org:
That said, fcron lacks /etc/cron.d/ functionality which was the most
important argument against it. I personally don't need that and I like
fcron a lot.
Are you sure about that? I mean, I didn't need /etc/cron.d,
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Am Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:27:27 +0200
schrieb Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org:
That said, fcron lacks /etc/cron.d/ functionality which was the most
important argument against it. I personally don't need that and I
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Am Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:27:27 +0200
schrieb Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org:
That said, fcron lacks /etc/cron.d/ functionality which was the
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Sander Jansen s.jan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de
wrote:
Am Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:27:27 +0200
schrieb Thomas Bächler
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:54:00 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
Unfortunately this particular issue is not like the good ol'
syslog-ng vs rsyslog debate, this one is about the present default
having bugs that upstream is not fixing.
No, this issue is worse than the syslog-ng vs.
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:30:26 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
dcron and fcron are not under active development,
fcron is under active development. It's just feature complete and
therefore not developed anymore, but bugs are still fixed if they
occur. So don't mix it up with a
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:30:26 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
dcron and fcron are not under active development,
fcron is under active development. It's just feature complete and
therefore not developed
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:57:58 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
All I want is a good decision to be made and have a crond that is not
buggy. Therefore I think that it is foolish not to present the
available options in an accurate light.
fcron is absolutely not buggy as far as I
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:57:58 -0600
schrieb Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com:
All I want is a good decision to be made and have a crond that is not
buggy. Therefore I think that it is foolish not to present the
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com wrote:
cronie has anacron features and I think is a good option.
Unfortunately cronie isn't even in [community] yet. I've been trying to get
it there for a while. Also, in what way is another crond + anacron inferior
to fcron?
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Kaiting Chen kaitocr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Thomas S Hatch thatc...@gmail.com wrote:
cronie has anacron features and I think is a good option.
Unfortunately cronie isn't even in [community] yet. I've been trying to get
it there
On 06/04/11, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
| Right, both are viable choices, btw I will be migrating my datacenters away
| from dcron in the near future and doing a series of tests on cronie and
| fcron, I will post my findings to the list.
Here's one reason I stopped using fcron and went to cronie:
|
On 04/06/2011 04:43 PM, Sander Jansen wrote:
This seems to be a monthly recurring discussion. How about not
providing any default, just put all the different cron(s) in extra?
I think eventually systemd will provide a cron-like service :)
Cheers,
Sander
Oh no, every distro needs a default
Am Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:07:17 +1000
schrieb Simon Perry a...@sanxion.net:
On 06/04/11, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
| Right, both are viable choices, btw I will be migrating my
datacenters away | from dcron in the near future and doing a series
of tests on cronie and | fcron, I will post my findings
Am Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:24:45 -0500
schrieb David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com:
Upstream stability makes sense. If redhat is behind cronie, then that
seems like the logical choice.
Why is this logical? Is it the developer what makes a software good or
is it the features and the
On 07/04/11, Heiko Baums wrote:
| And this doesn't work in dcron, at least not as reliable as
| the equivalent bootrun of fcron. And that's one point why fcron is
| much better than dcron. Are you sure that this is working in cronie? If
| yes, are you sure that this works in cronie as reliable as
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:24 PM, David C. Rankin
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote:
On 04/06/2011 04:43 PM, Sander Jansen wrote:
This seems to be a monthly recurring discussion. How about not
providing any default, just put all the different cron(s) in extra?
I think eventually systemd
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 00:29:36 +0200 Heiko Baums wrote:
cronie extends the original vixie cron package so the syntax, core
feature set, etc are stable
cronie implements advanced security hooks as well and can integrate
with SELINUX (I am saving the include SELINUX support in base for a
I can think of three considerations for a cron daemon:
1 . Minimal - its a cron daemon, it does not need to be complex
2. Active development
3. Anacron functionality
As far as I can see this leaves us with fcron, dcron and cronie. Cronie
probably has the highest assurance for upstream development
Am Tue, 05 Apr 2011 08:41:13 +0200
schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com:
We all know the situation with dcron (it can't keep time properly) and
it still is broken. No fix (or any changes for that matter) have gone
into its upstream git for over a year now. There have been multiple
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 08:41:13 +0200
Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com wrote:
We all know the situation with dcron (it can't keep time properly) and
it still is broken. No fix (or any changes for that matter) have gone
into its upstream git for over a year now. There have been multiple
73 matches
Mail list logo
