Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#3890 - /etc/cron.* & /usr/sbin/run-cron should be in a separate package

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Manolis Tzanidakis (mtzanidakis) - Friday, 03 February 2006, 00:26 GMT
Last edited by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Friday, 18 July 2008, 15:50 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category System
Status Closed
Assigned To Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 0.7.1 Noodle
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Hello,
I think it'd be nice to have more cron daemon options (like fcron, vixie-cron, etc) in Arch available in extra.
dcron should remain in base since it's being used for so long & it's quite great for most uses.
In case you agree with that consider moving /etc/cron.* dirs & /usr/sbin/run-cron in a separate package (something
like cron-base) which all cron daemons should have as dependency.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Friday, 18 July 2008, 15:50 GMT
Reason for closing:  Deferred
Additional comments about closing:  Implementing this would add needless complexity, while we don't even have an alternative to dcron in core or extra.
Comment by arjan timmerman (blaasvis) - Sunday, 26 March 2006, 13:04 GMT
maybe it is a good idea to move /etc/cron.* to the filesystem package ?
Comment by Gavin Bisesi (Daenyth) - Thursday, 24 April 2008, 20:18 GMT
Would cron be needed by every system? I think the idea of a cron-base package isn't too bad.

In any case, looks like this is still open.
/usr/sbin/run-cron is owned by dcron 3.2-3
Comment by Glenn Matthys (RedShift) - Friday, 18 July 2008, 12:51 GMT
I don't see any reason why the above changes should be made. There's nothing wrong with dcron, and the files in /etc/cron.* aren't even provided by dcron, although the directories are. We don't even have another cron daemon in core or extra.
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Friday, 18 July 2008, 15:40 GMT
Yeah I have to agree with Glenn here. This seems like needless complexity when we don't even have another cron package. Moving the dirs to the filesystem package isn't really a big deal, BUT what if someone doesn't want cron at all - then they have directory clutter.

I think I want to defer this until we have another cron package that actually produces some sort of issues

Loading...