On 7/7/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Saturday 07 July 2007, Peter Gordon wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 04:23 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > you missed a critical aspect: offline time. the way run-crons is
> > implemented, if you happen to routinely shut your machine off at the time
> > that the cronjob is supposed to fire, then the standard you proposed will
> > pretty much never fire. the run-crons implementation however has a
> > pretty good guarantee that the periodic crons will get fired at the next
> > uptime opportunity.
>
> Isn't this perfectly what anacron is intended for?
yes and no ... anacron is designed with this issue in mind, but as the
homepage of anacron explains, it does not replace the normal cron
functionality and as such cannot be used on its own
I have to disagree in this particular case. The anacron homepage,
anacron.sourceforge.net, gives this exact situation as its primary
example of what anacron is intended for. Sure, it's not good for
handling more complex scheduling, but it seems to do what run-crons
tries to do: run jobs that should have been executed while the
computer was off, as soon as it comes back on. Am I missing something
subtle?
--
Ryan Reich
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
