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@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
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
--
Ionuț
