1 |
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013, Pavlos Ratis wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013, Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14 |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from |
7 |
> > vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last |
8 |
> > time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it |
9 |
> > fixing some bugs :/ |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > What do you think? |
12 |
|
13 |
Thanks for bringing it to attention: I've always been happy with vixie-cron, |
14 |
so never even thought of switching. It's good to know the code is being |
15 |
maintained, albeit in a fork. |
16 |
|
17 |
> I am all for it. I wouldn't say that vixie-cron is dead since it is still |
18 |
> functional, however I would rather say that it is outdated. |
19 |
> In my opinion, cronie, unlike the other cron variants is the most reliable. |
20 |
|
21 |
Ah that's good to know: the only hesitation on my part was that fcron appears |
22 |
more functional, but if someone wants that they can install it themselves, |
23 |
and this way we get anacron out of the box, and maintained code. |
24 |
|
25 |
> Also, many other distributions like Arch[1] and openSUSE[2] have already |
26 |
> switched from vixie-cron to cronie. |
27 |
|
28 |
Yeah that helps in terms of documentation, collaboration and just knowing |
29 |
it's not a risky move. I'm all for it, too, especially now Dale's done the |
30 |
guinea-pig run ;) |
31 |
|
32 |
Regards, |
33 |
steveL |
34 |
-- |
35 |
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-) |