| 1 |
On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 7:26 PM Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 3/2/19 7:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > Is there a reason we still use run-parts and the |
| 6 |
> > /etc/cron.{hourly,daily,weekly,monthly} structure to run repeating cron jobs? |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > From what I read in the chat earlier, it sounds like the modern crons |
| 9 |
> > might be able to handle this without that structure, but I'm not sure. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/69777 |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Totally. We should replace run-parts with something much simpler and |
| 14 |
> more predictable. Then, if that doesn't work for you, all modern crons |
| 15 |
> can do the things that run-parts tries to do, but better. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I'm not sure I see the connection here. All run-parts does is run all |
| 19 |
the scripts in a directory. That seems pretty simple and |
| 20 |
deterministic. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
The bug is about cronbase, which contains run-crons, along with |
| 23 |
installing the cron.d directories. I could see an argument for |
| 24 |
splitting that package though obviously the package is already pretty |
| 25 |
simple. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I imagine most cron implementations do not use run-crons. Whether any |
| 28 |
particular one (like vixie-cron) should seems like a matter of taste. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Are we just talking about not having vixie-cron use run-crons? And |
| 31 |
instead having it just have time-scheduled jobs for run-parts on the |
| 32 |
various cron.* directories? That seems a bit narrower in scope than |
| 33 |
what was originally suggested, though it isn't clear to me what is |
| 34 |
being suggested... |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Rich |
Archives