James Carlson wrote: > I assume you're talking about CR 6399739. Yes.
> Yes, that'd be a good idea. The one issue I see there is that the > crontab interfaces are standards-related issues, so you can't just do > an inetconv-type one-way slurp. The compatibility story would have to > be an important part of it. Yes, but not really any more than the issues for /etc/rc*.d and /etc/inetd.conf. Those aren't governed by standards, but they do have backwards-compatibility concerns that are arguably just as important. (Is /etc/inetd.conf really ignored if you don't run inetconv? Doesn't that break many third-party network listeners?) > (Perhaps it's simple. Just have two different mechanisms -- old cron, > not in SMF, and new cron via SMF instances.) Maybe. I'd think more in terms of the traditional crontab files being slurped in in addition to the SMF-based jobs. The actual runtime processing would be identical for the two. Still relatively simple.
