[arch-general] Replace dcron once again?

Leonid Isaev lisaev at indiana.edu
Sun Nov 7 22:27:48 CET 2010

I guess, the discussion is about including fcron into /core and on installation
media. From this perspective, having two daemons might be a deal breaker.


On (11/07/10 21:09), Heiko Baums wrote:
--> Am Sun, 7 Nov 2010 13:57:50 -0500
--> schrieb Kaiting Chen <kaitocracy at gmail.com>:
--> > I think fcron is kind of heavy for most users. I'd rather we switch to
--> > cronie, which is the descendent of vixie-cron. It's developed by
--> > RedHat, well maintained, supports PAM and SELinux and can be built
--> > with anacron features.
--> I disagree with Kaiting, because cronie doesn't have anacron features.
--> If it's compiled with --enable-anacron there is no anacron feature
--> compiled into cronie. Instead there is a separate anacron daemon
--> compiled and that makes it unnecessarily complicated in using and
--> configuring it. And people who need anacron features have to run two
--> daemons and configure two daemons.
--> With fcron you have all in one and need to run and configure only one
--> daemon. And fcron is by far not bloated and complicated to configure.
--> Instead there are several ways to configure fcron like crontab, scripts
--> in /etc/cron.{daily,weekly,monthly} and in /etc/cron.d. And to use
--> anacron features you only need to prefix a crontab entry with an @.
--> So I think fcron is much more flexible, much easier to configure and to
--> use than cronie, and has features for rather every use case.
--> And, please, don't make such a regression again.
--> Btw., cronie is in AUR since May and still has only 1 vote while fcron
--> is proven to run very well since years.
--> Heiko

lisaev at svibor

More information about the arch-general mailing list