[arch-general] Change Arch's default crond

[Kaiting Chen]

On Apr 21, 2011, at 17:30, Grigorios Bouzakis <grbzks at xsmail.com> wrote:

> Ionut Biru wrote:
>> On 04/22/2011 12:11 AM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>>> Ionut Biru wrote:
>>>> On 04/21/2011 02:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
>>>>> Am Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:48:04 +0200
>>>>> schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haase<sh at lutzhaase.com>:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I second this suggestion. cronie upstream isn't dead at all. cronie
>>>>>> is a drop-in unlike fcron which was favored earlier.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Is it such a drop-in like the new dcron when dcron upstream was adopted
>>>>> by this Arch user?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Better look at the features and the use cases (don't only think of some
>>>>> 24/7 servers, but also think of the desktop users) and not at some small
>>>>> differences in the crontab syntax. It's definitely not such a big work
>>>>> to re-adjust a few crontab entries if this is necessary at all. And this
>>>>> work has to be done only once and can probably be done with sed.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> i think you are not understanding the process.
>>>> 
>>>> if cronie is moved in core, it won't have a replaces=dcron. Only new
>>>> installations will get cronie by default instead of dcron.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> How is that possible? Are you saying that the broken dcron will stay in
>>> core and there will two packages for cron?
>>> Otherwise i dont understand how it wont be replaced (for all users).
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> if this will happen, the steps are very simple
>> 1) remove dcron from core
>> 2) add cronie/fcron to core in base group and depending on the package, 
>> it might have conflicts=dcron but not replaces
>> 
>> this way the existent systems will still have a "working" cron and new 
>> installations will have the new cron
>> 
> 
> Has that ever happened before?
> That means the existing systems will have a package from base thats not
> supported by the Arch developers.
> But since its not replaced, it would make it an infinite part of Arch so
> it should also be supported.
> Plus, the 2010.05 ISOs will still (try to) install it, but it wont be
> there, and there wont be an upgrade path either.
> Anyway, first time i've heard about such a plan. It makes absolutely no
> sense to me. I seriously doubt its gonna work. But good luck.
> 
> ----
> Greg

Things have got to be deprecated eventually. Why can't we keep dcron in [core] for a while longer? And remove it when any install media that requires it becomes unsupported?

Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/