Re: Bug#391836: debian-policy: New virtual package: cron-daemon
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 01:43:39PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>>>> Hi, the bcron-run package provides /etc/crontab, which includes
>>
>>>>> 24 4 * * * root test -x /usr/sbin/anacron || run-parts --report /etc/cron.daily
>>>> Ok, then the bcron-run package (but not the bcron package) would meet that
>>>> requirement.
>>> So. We have a criteria that would allow for anyone needing to
>>> set up a periodic cron job, and at least two packages that provide such
>>> functionality: cron, and bcron-run.
>>> Is this sufficient to add a virtual package?
>> Given that there's demand for it, seems fine to me.
> Do I hear another second?
Sure, I'll second it.
> Russ, do you still want policy changed, given that the requirements are
> so pared down now?
I just want to be sure that we write down the criteria that we came up
with in this thread somewhere so that people know when they can provide
the virtual package.
Separately, I'll note that Policy 9.5 strongly implies that
/etc/cron.d/<file> will work, using "the same syntax as /etc/crontab"
without specifying what that syntax is. If the Debian project is going to
support alternative cron daemons than the default, we really need to
document what that syntax is so that packages know what to expect and what
they can safely use.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: