On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 10:40:02AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Thu, Oct 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 01:43:39PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> >> Hi, the bcron-run package provides /etc/crontab, which includes > > > >> >> 24 4 * * * root test -x /usr/sbin/anacron || run-parts --report > >> >> /etc/cron.daily > > > >> > Ok, then the bcron-run package (but not the bcron package) would meet > >> > that > >> > requirement. > > > >> So. We have a criteria that would allow for anyone needing to > >> set up a periodic cron job, and at least two packages that provide such > >> functionality: cron, and bcron-run. > > > >> Is this sufficient to add a virtual package? > > > > Given that there's demand for it, seems fine to me. > > Do I hear another second? Russ, do you still want policy > changed, given that the requirements are so pared down now?
What I like to know is the use case for such virtual package. I know about popularity-contest cron.daily job, but waht about the other ? Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
