paul at mattal.com
Sun Jan 3 23:23:28 EST 2010
On 01/03/2010 10:28 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Paul Mattal wrote:
>> We've got several bugs relating to choosing a new default cron daemon,
>> and/or supporting other alternatives.
> I thought we decided on fcron with the small adjustment/script needed to
> support /etc/cron.d in the last round of discussion about this. bcron
> was also popular (+1 from me...) but then we need an anacron replacement
> too (i.e. fcron).
Is there also an issue we're trying to solve with anacron? Can't we use
bcron (or any other cron for that matter) and still use anacron separately?
I understand that fcron could theoretically do the work of both, but
don't see an inherent advantage over two separate tools which might each
be better at their own job.
More information about the arch-dev-public