1 |
On 7/7/07, Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On Saturday 07 July 2007, Peter Gordon wrote: |
3 |
> > On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 04:23 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
4 |
> > > you missed a critical aspect: offline time. the way run-crons is |
5 |
> > > implemented, if you happen to routinely shut your machine off at the time |
6 |
> > > that the cronjob is supposed to fire, then the standard you proposed will |
7 |
> > > pretty much never fire. the run-crons implementation however has a |
8 |
> > > pretty good guarantee that the periodic crons will get fired at the next |
9 |
> > > uptime opportunity. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > Isn't this perfectly what anacron is intended for? |
12 |
> |
13 |
> yes and no ... anacron is designed with this issue in mind, but as the |
14 |
> homepage of anacron explains, it does not replace the normal cron |
15 |
> functionality and as such cannot be used on its own |
16 |
|
17 |
I have to disagree in this particular case. The anacron homepage, |
18 |
anacron.sourceforge.net, gives this exact situation as its primary |
19 |
example of what anacron is intended for. Sure, it's not good for |
20 |
handling more complex scheduling, but it seems to do what run-crons |
21 |
tries to do: run jobs that should have been executed while the |
22 |
computer was off, as soon as it comes back on. Am I missing something |
23 |
subtle? |
24 |
|
25 |
-- |
26 |
Ryan Reich |
27 |
-- |
28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |