Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread John Galt
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Seth Arnold wrote: >* Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 07:29]: >> Good. How about something like "cron.* scripts should not produce any >> non-error output in general. An exception may be made if the >> intention of the script is to mail a status report to root." >

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 06:34:33PM +0100, Arthur Korn wrote: > So what about: > >cron.* scripts should not produce any non-error output in >general. An exception may be made if the intention of the >script is to mail a status report to the administrator. > > Though I feel that the ex

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread Seth Arnold
* Arthur Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 09:35]: > So what about: > >cron.* scripts should not produce any non-error output in >general. An exception may be made if the intention of the >script is to mail a status report to the administrator. I like this, though the "should not use

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread Arthur Korn
Roland Mas schrieb: > Julian Gilbey (2001-02-20 16:23:10 +) : > > > This is because stdout gets mailed to root by cron. > > ...unless otherwise specified: So what about: cron.* scripts should not produce any non-error output in general. An exception may be made if the intention of th

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread Roland Mas
Julian Gilbey (2001-02-20 16:23:10 +) : > This is because stdout gets mailed to root by cron. ...unless otherwise specified: [...] In addition to LOGNAME, HOME, and SHELL, cron(8) will look at MAILTO if it has any reason to send mail as a result of running commands in

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 07:49:34AM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote: > * Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 07:29]: > > Good. How about something like "cron.* scripts should not produce any > > non-error output in general. An exception may be made if the > > intention of the script is to mail a st

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread Seth Arnold
* Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 07:29]: > Good. How about something like "cron.* scripts should not produce any > non-error output in general. An exception may be made if the > intention of the script is to mail a status report to root." Why specifically root? I could imagine situati

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-20 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 09:15:09AM +0100, Arthur Korn wrote: > Joey Hess schrieb: > > Julian Gilbey wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 10:43:09AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote: > > > > Probably it should be clearly stated in policy that the cron.* > > > > scripts may be quiet if no errors are encounte

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-16 Thread Arthur Korn
Hi Joey Hess schrieb: > Julian Gilbey wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 10:43:09AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote: > > > Probably it should be clearly stated in policy that the cron.* > > > scripts may be quiet if no errors are encountered. > > What do people think of this suggestion (s/may/MUST/)? >

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-15 Thread Remco Blaakmeer
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > On 20010213T084841-0800, Joey Hess wrote: > > I dislike it. It's possible some package will exist that is _designed_ > > to fire off daily status reports by cron. We shouldn't prohibit such > > things without reason. > > An example is vrms. An

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-13 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 08:48:41AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > Julian Gilbey wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 10:43:09AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote: > > > Probably it should be clearly stated in policy that the cron.* > > > scripts may be quiet if no errors are encountered. > > > > > > Running logch

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-13 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On 20010213T084841-0800, Joey Hess wrote: > I dislike it. It's possible some package will exist that is _designed_ > to fire off daily status reports by cron. We shouldn't prohibit such > things without reason. An example is vrms. -- %%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.ik

Re: [PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-13 Thread Joey Hess
Julian Gilbey wrote: > On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 10:43:09AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote: > > Probably it should be clearly stated in policy that the cron.* > > scripts may be quiet if no errors are encountered. > > > > Running logcheck can be really amusing sometimes ... ;) > > What do people think of

[PROPOSAL] cron.* scripts should be quiet

2001-02-13 Thread Julian Gilbey
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.5.0.0 Severity: wishlist On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 10:43:09AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote: > Hi > > Probably it should be clearly stated in policy that the cron.* > scripts may be quiet if no errors are encountered. > > Running logcheck can be really amusing sometime