[arch-general] Replace dcron once again?

[Alex Matviychuk]

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 13:10, Alex Matviychuk <alexmat at gmail.com> wrote:
> For such a crucial system package it would seem wise to deal with the
> devil that's easier to understand (in theory, I don't claim to
> understand the internals of e.

That should read:

For such a crucial system package it would seem wise to deal with the
devil that's easier to understand (in theory, I don't claim to
understand the internals of either package, but if I was forced to
debug both, I imagine dcron would be easier to deal with based on
lines of code alone.)