Re: [PROPOSAL] Cron jobs
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Kurt Wall wrote:
> The argument that a 10K shell/perl/python/whatever script is simpler than
> writing a one-line wrapper around the same script and executing it from
> /etc/cron.d/ begs the question.
No, it does not. It is one thing to ask an user to take a look at a script
somewhere in /etc to modify it for his system and another thing to ask
him to hack soime script in /usr/bin. There is the argument that those
cron scripts don't have necessarily to go in /usr/bin or /usr/sbin, that
one can create an additional directory for them, at which point I fail to
see what we saved over not going with /etc/cron.daily in the first place.
> This objection is to specifying a particular product, not to the idea. If
> we specify anacron,
Okay, anacron-like. To date anacron is the only one that does what we
need, so we could at least give it that much credit and say that we want
an anacron-like type of setup.
> and a better mousetrap comes along next year, vendors
> either support an inferior product, break the standard in order to switch
> to the new product, or ship both, adding to their workload (not that
> managing 77k is so bad, but you get the idea).
anacron is perfectly compatible with vixie-cron, so there are no worries
about switching and maintaining compatibility.
> Is specifying the behavior we want worse than specifying a particular
> implentation?
No, but the problem is that we can not always define things in some
standard way and it is much easier to tell people exactly waht we are
after....
Cristian
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cristian Gafton -- gafton@redhat.com -- Red Hat Software, Inc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNIX is user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.
Reply to: