[gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Pacho Ramos]

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14

This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
fixing some bugs :/

What do you think?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Lars Wendler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 548 bytes --]

Am Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:55:05 +0100
schrieb Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>:

> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
> 
> This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> fixing some bugs :/
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 

+1 from me (as the package maintainer of cronie I cannot vote
differently here :P)

-- 
Lars Wendler
Gentoo package maintainer

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Jeff Horelick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 668 bytes --]

I'm a nobody, but +1 from me.


On 10 December 2013 16:33, Lars Wendler <polynomial-c@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Am Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:55:05 +0100
> schrieb Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>:
>
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
> >
> > This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> > vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> > time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> > fixing some bugs :/
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> +1 from me (as the package maintainer of cronie I cannot vote
> differently here :P)
>
> --
> Lars Wendler
> Gentoo package maintainer
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1297 bytes --]

RE: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Paul B. Henson]

> From: Pacho Ramos [mailto:pacho@gentoo.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 12:55 PM
>
> This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> fixing some bugs :/
> 
> What do you think?

I'd say go one step further and get rid of vixie-cron completely, is there anything it does that cronie can't do as well or better? It's getting pretty crusty, with a lot of open bugs that haven't been resolved. While updating the handbook might get new users to use a better cron, masking vixie-cron (and perhaps a news item?) could get existing users to migrate to a supported and maintained cron as well…

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 12/10/2013 09:18 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> 
> I'd say go one step further and get rid of vixie-cron completely, is
> there anything it does that cronie can't do as well or better?

Is cronie a drop-in replacement, or do I have to do some thinking when
replacing vixie-cron?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Mike Gilbert]

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 12/10/2013 09:18 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
>>
>> I'd say go one step further and get rid of vixie-cron completely, is
>> there anything it does that cronie can't do as well or better?
>
> Is cronie a drop-in replacement, or do I have to do some thinking when
> replacing vixie-cron?
>

It should be a drop-in. The only change to make would be to remove
vixie-cron and add cronie to the default runlevel.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Dale]

Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On 12/10/2013 09:18 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
>>> I'd say go one step further and get rid of vixie-cron completely, is
>>> there anything it does that cronie can't do as well or better?
>> Is cronie a drop-in replacement, or do I have to do some thinking when
>> replacing vixie-cron?
>>
> It should be a drop-in. The only change to make would be to remove
> vixie-cron and add cronie to the default runlevel.
>
>

I switched my system and that is all I had to do.  I think "drop-in" is
a good term.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-) 

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 12/11/2013 03:03 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>
>> Is cronie a drop-in replacement, or do I have to do some thinking when
>> replacing vixie-cron?
>>
> 
> It should be a drop-in. The only change to make would be to remove
> vixie-cron and add cronie to the default runlevel.
> 

I noticed two small differences:

  1. Emails come from "(Cron Daemon)" instead of "Cron Daemon".

  2. The binary is /usr/sbin/crond instead of /usr/sbin/cron.

Everything else seems normal.

Here are the steps to update; they're obvious, but it's easy to skip
some accidentally:

  rc-update del vixie-cron default
  /etc/init.d/vixie-cron stop
  emerge -C vixie-cron
  emerge cronie
  rc-update add cronie default
  /etc/init.d/cronie start

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 250 bytes --]

>   rc-update del vixie-cron default
>   /etc/init.d/vixie-cron stop
>   emerge -C vixie-cron
>   emerge cronie
>   rc-update add cronie default
>   /etc/init.d/cronie start

Why /etc/init.d instead of rc-service? :)

-- 
Best regsrds,
mva

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 12/23/2013 10:54 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
>>   rc-update del vixie-cron default
>>   /etc/init.d/vixie-cron stop
>>   emerge -C vixie-cron
>>   emerge cronie
>>   rc-update add cronie default
>>   /etc/init.d/cronie start
> 
> Why /etc/init.d instead of rc-service? :)
> 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh tab completion? Yes that's it.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Alice Ferrazzi]

On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org> wrote:
>   rc-update del vixie-cron default
>   /etc/init.d/vixie-cron stop
>   emerge -C vixie-cron
>   emerge cronie
>   rc-update add cronie default
>   /etc/init.d/cronie start

I Just did the same, is simple and "drop-in"

-- 

Gentoo,  If it moves, compile it!
My_overlay: https://github.com/aliceinwire/overlay
Mail: Alice Ferrazzi <alice.ferrazzi@gmail.com>
PGP: 0EE4 555E 3AAC B4A4 798D 9AC5 8E31 1808 C553 2D33

[gentoo-dev] Re: Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Duncan]

Alice Ferrazzi posted on Wed, 25 Dec 2013 15:38:42 +0900 as excerpted:

> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>> rc-update del vixie-cron default
>> /etc/init.d/vixie-cron stop
>> emerge -C vixie-cron
>> emerge cronie
>> rc-update add cronie default
>> /etc/init.d/cronie start
> 
> I Just did the same, is simple and "drop-in"

I did it too, a few days ago.

TL;DR: Drop-in but for the log-spamming. =:^(

While cronie itself was simple and drop-in for vixie-cron, it DID start 
rather severely log-spamming, IIRC four log-lines every 10 minutes when 
the run-crons ran.  As a result, while the functionality was drop-in 
replacement, for the system as a whole it wasn't purely a drop-in 
replacement, as I had to adjust logging somewhat to kill the spamming.

An update tweak to my syslog-ng.conf category-cron filter later, and I 
was down to a single log entry in the general messages log every ten 
minutes, the other three diverted to my separate cron log.

The  remaining one was an audit entry (type=1006) output by the kernel.  
Of course I could filter that out or divert it to the cron log too, but 
first I needed to know the significance.  After all, it's not often I get 
the kernel outputting audit entries.

A bit of googling later, I found that the type 1006 audit entries I was 
getting were AUDIT_LOGIN related, due to the way cron changes user to run 
its various programmed entries.  Of course one can turn off the kernel's 
corresponding audit options, but that affects other things too.  
Meanwhile, the google turned up some RHEL/Fedora complaints about 
something similar.  Apparently in this case the kernel defaults to log-
spamming even if audit logging is generally deactivated.  I could try 
installing an audit tool and configure it to turn that off specifically, 
but meh, just set a syslog filter for it; the effect is the same either 
way.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Daniel Campbell]

On 12/25/2013 08:43 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Alice Ferrazzi posted on Wed, 25 Dec 2013 15:38:42 +0900 as excerpted:
> 
>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>>> rc-update del vixie-cron default
>>> /etc/init.d/vixie-cron stop
>>> emerge -C vixie-cron
>>> emerge cronie
>>> rc-update add cronie default
>>> /etc/init.d/cronie start
>>
>> I Just did the same, is simple and "drop-in"
> 
> I did it too, a few days ago.
> 
> TL;DR: Drop-in but for the log-spamming. =:^(
> 
> While cronie itself was simple and drop-in for vixie-cron, it DID start 
> rather severely log-spamming, IIRC four log-lines every 10 minutes when 
> the run-crons ran.  As a result, while the functionality was drop-in 
> replacement, for the system as a whole it wasn't purely a drop-in 
> replacement, as I had to adjust logging somewhat to kill the spamming.
> 
> An update tweak to my syslog-ng.conf category-cron filter later, and I 
> was down to a single log entry in the general messages log every ten 
> minutes, the other three diverted to my separate cron log.
> 
> The  remaining one was an audit entry (type=1006) output by the kernel.  
> Of course I could filter that out or divert it to the cron log too, but 
> first I needed to know the significance.  After all, it's not often I get 
> the kernel outputting audit entries.
> 
> A bit of googling later, I found that the type 1006 audit entries I was 
> getting were AUDIT_LOGIN related, due to the way cron changes user to run 
> its various programmed entries.  Of course one can turn off the kernel's 
> corresponding audit options, but that affects other things too.  
> Meanwhile, the google turned up some RHEL/Fedora complaints about 
> something similar.  Apparently in this case the kernel defaults to log-
> spamming even if audit logging is generally deactivated.  I could try 
> installing an audit tool and configure it to turn that off specifically, 
> but meh, just set a syslog filter for it; the effect is the same either 
> way.
> 

Could you share the lines that provided the filtering? I'm sure it would
help others. Your e-mail led me to check my logs to see if I have the
same, but I don't know where to look.

[gentoo-dev] Re: Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Duncan]

Daniel Campbell posted on Thu, 26 Dec 2013 22:02:31 -0600 as excerpted:

> On 12/25/2013 08:43 AM, Duncan wrote:
>> 
>> I [replaced vixie-cron with cronie] too, a few days ago.
>> 
>> TL;DR: Drop-in but for the log-spamming. =:^(
>> 
>> While cronie itself was simple and drop-in for vixie-cron, it DID start
>> rather severely log-spamming, IIRC four log-lines every 10 minutes when
>> the run-crons ran.

> Could you share the lines that provided the filtering? I'm sure it would
> help others. Your e-mail led me to check my logs to see if I have the
> same, but I don't know where to look.

I think I mentioned that I'm using syslog-ng here.  ~arch, so version
3.4.6.  Stable 3.4.2 should be similar but it may not be identical.

I had started to post a big long explanation, but then decided simply
posting my entire syslog-ng.conf file with a shorter explanation would be
better.  There's nothing really private in it.

The way I handle filters is to setup the original message-selecting
filters first, then combine them with AND NOT as appropriate in a second-
level message-rejecting filter.  I have two sets of filters, thus two
second level filters into which the others feed, the spam filters and the
category filters.

The category filters are setup to select a particular category of
messages; for instance, all messages from cron.  The category selecting
filter is then used in a log section, to route the selected messages to a
particular file.  The second level rejecting filter is in turn used to
filter out all the categorized messages from the log stream going to the
generic messages file, so it doesn't get the categorized messages and is
thus less noisy, making it easier to process what /does/ come thru.

The spam filters are setup similarly, with individual selection filters
and a single second level rejection filter, except I don't want to log
those messages at all, so the only thing the selection filters are used
for is to feed into the rejection filter.  Still, that seemed the simplest
and most logical way to handle it, to me.

Setup that way, the log sections stay short and simple, not the hairball
of individual selection and rejection filters they could become otherwise.

OK, the file is included inline after my sig, below...  (Since I
use pan for my lists via nntp://news.gmane.org, and pan normally yencodes
attachments for USENET posting while most mail clients don't handle yenc,
I won't try attaching the file that way as it'd come thru as gibberish to
most.  I could inline UUE it, but as it's text anyway, I'll post it inline
with auto-wrapping off and hope it doesn't get mangled.)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman




@version: 3.4
@include "scl.conf"
# /etc/syslog-ng/syslog-ng.conf
# JED: don't etc-update replace!

#################################################################################
#########	Options:	syslog-ng general options		#########
#################################################################################

options {
	threaded(yes);
	stats_freq (43200);
	mark_freq (3600);
};


#################################################################################
#########	Sources:	where messages come from		#########
#################################################################################

source src {
	system();
	internal();
};

#################################################################################
#########	Destinations:	where messages go			#########
#################################################################################

# NOTE: Default destination output format template
# (admin guide section 11.1.2, templates and macros)

#template default { 
#	(template("${ISODATE} ${HOST} ${MSGHDR}${MSG}\n");
#	template_escape(no);
#};

# ${MSGHDR} further defines to "PROGRAM[PID]: " (note trailing space),
# with a kernel MSGHDR obviously lacking [PID], so...

# final format is: ISODATE HOST PROGRAM[PID] MSG(=content)

###################################################

# global destinations

destination messages {
	file ("/var/log/messages");
};

destination log-tty {
	file ("/dev/tty12");
};

# for programs like xconsole using /dev/console...
#destination dev-console {
#	file ("/dev/console");
#};

###################################################

# categorized destinations

destination IPTables {
	file ("/var/log/iptables"); };

destination dhcpcd {
	file ("/var/log/dhcpcd");
};

destination cron {
	file ("/var/log/cron");
};

destination portage {
	file ("/var/log/portage-msg");
};

#################################################################################
#########	Filters:	which messages				#########
#################################################################################

# log-spam pre-filters, combined in spam-global, below

# sudo has its own, better log, but pam_unix spams it to syslog too
filter spam-sudo {
			program ("sudo")
;};

# 2013.1217 kernel type=1006 (AUDIT_LOGIN) auditing enabled and logging
# on cron's 10-minute run-crons.
# kernel: type=1006 audit(1387288201.202:209): pid=5760 uid=0 old auid=501
#		new auid=0 old ses=2 new ses=208 res=1
filter spam-audit {
			program ("kernel")
	and		message ("type=1006 audit")
;};

#####################

# Combine all the log-spam filters into one

filter spam-global {
		not	filter (spam-audit)
	and	not	filter (spam-sudo)
;};

###################################################

# Category filters

filter cat-IPTables {
			message ("IPTables:")
;};

filter cat-dhcpcd {
			program ("dhcpcd")
;};

filter cat-cron {
			program ("crond?" flags("ignore-case"))
;};

filter cat-portage {
	message (" portage")
;};

#####################

# /not/ the cat-filters above

filter cat-not {
		not	filter (cat-IPTables)
	and	not	filter (cat-dhcpcd)
	and	not	filter (cat-cron)
	and	not	filter (cat-portage)
;};

#################################################################################
#########	Logs:		connect sources, filters, destinations	#########
#################################################################################

# general case, minus the categorized, below

log {
	source (src);
	filter (spam-global);
	filter (cat-not);
	destination (messages);
};

log {
	source (src);
	filter (spam-global);
	filter (cat-not);
	destination (log-tty);
};

###################################################

# These categorize

log {
	source (src);
	filter (cat-IPTables);
	destination (IPTables);
};

log {
	source (src);
	filter (cat-cron);
	destination (cron);
};

log {
	source (src);
	filter (cat-dhcpcd);
	destination (dhcpcd);
};

log {
	source (src);
	filter (cat-portage);
	destination (portage);
};

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Sven Vermeulen]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:55:05PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
> 
> This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> fixing some bugs :/
> 
> What do you think?

I'm ok with it. At least cronie's main website is quick to find, and I
remember a bug I sent in to the cronie maintainers and got a fast reply, so
positive experience as well.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Peter Stuge]

Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie
> forked it fixing some bugs :/
> 
> What do you think?

I think that nobody who is not intimately familiar with the
development in both projects can think anything that is actionable.

It's insulting to see how people all over the internet run as fast
as they possibly can in whatever direction even though they have
nearly zero detailed understanding of the options they are choosing
between.

A fork is never automatically a good thing. "fixing some bugs" sounds
like makeup.


//Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Alexander Tsoy]

On Wed Dec 11 23:30:58 2013 Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie
> > forked it fixing some bugs :/
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> I think that nobody who is not intimately familiar with the
> development in both projects can think anything that is actionable.

vixie-cron upstream is dead and this is a well-known fact. Example of "development" in vixie-cron project:

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=308055

-- 
Alexander Tsoy

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Ben Kohler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 561 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:
>
>
> I think that nobody who is not intimately familiar with the
> development in both projects can think anything that is actionable.
>
> It's insulting to see how people all over the internet run as fast
> as they possibly can in whatever direction even though they have
> nearly zero detailed understanding of the options they are choosing
> between.
>
> Suggesting cronie in the handbook seems like a no-brainer.  Do you have
some information on vixie-cron that we're all missing?

-Ben

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1021 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Markos Chandras]

On 12/10/2013 08:55 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
> 
> This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> fixing some bugs :/
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 

If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say, then I agree we should move
away from it.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Peter Stuge]

Markos Chandras wrote:
> > Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died
> 
> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say

Define dead?


//Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Wulf C. Krueger]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11.12.2013 22:07, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say
> Define dead?

The latest upstream release is this:

cron_4.1.shar	2004-Jan-23 19:20:23	200.7K	application/octet-stream

As you can see, it will turn ten soon.

Of course, distros are patching the crap out of it but nobody ever
took over maintenance. RedHat instead forked it about six years ago
and called it "cronie".

ISC, who released the above version, don't even list it any more among
their software.

I daresay that's basically the very definition of "dead".

- -- 
Best regards, Wulf

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlKo44EACgkQnuVXRcSi+5oJNgCeKpeeyFmxEJ462GnfQaboBDV+
ubAAni1jxYpGfrD63CiJmw7vKRfsrSnJ
=fPPx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 464 bytes --]

12.12.2013 01:07, Peter Stuge пишет:
> Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died
>>
>> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say
> 
> Define dead?
> 
> 
> //Peter
> 

Bugs are not fixed for a very long time, no answers on private e-mails
or in maillists.

-- 
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead
Gentoo Qt project lead
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Peter Stuge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 293 bytes --]

Sergey Popov wrote:
> >>> Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died
> >>
> >> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say
> > 
> > Define dead?
> 
> Bugs are not fixed for a very long time, no answers on private
> e-mails or in maillists.

Define very long time?


//Peter

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Ben Kohler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 516 bytes --]

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:

> Sergey Popov wrote:
> > >>> Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died
> > >>
> > >> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say
> > >
> > > Define dead?
> >
> > Bugs are not fixed for a very long time, no answers on private
> > e-mails or in maillists.
>
> Define very long time?
>
>
> //Peter
>
If you have some reason we should be sticking to vixie-cron, please stop
being so mysterious and share it with the rest of us.

Thanks!
-Ben

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1091 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Brian Dolbec]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 762 bytes --]

On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 17:08 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Sergey Popov wrote:
> > >>> Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died
> > >>
> > >> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say
> > > 
> > > Define dead?
> > 
> > Bugs are not fixed for a very long time, no answers on private
> > e-mails or in maillists.
> 
> Define very long time?
> 
> 
> //Peter

Please,... just look at the Changelog!  

quote, first added to the tree: *vixie-cron-4.1 (27 Aug 2004)

and it has been patched ever since, picking up patches from other
distros, etc., fixing bugs,...

Currently at revision 14.

Plus I don't recall that it be tree-cleaned in this thread, just to
change the default in the install manual to one that is being developed.


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 620 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Markos Chandras]

On 12/13/2013 04:53 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 17:08 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> Sergey Popov wrote:
>>>>>> Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died
>>>>>
>>>>> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say
>>>>
>>>> Define dead?
>>>
>>> Bugs are not fixed for a very long time, no answers on private
>>> e-mails or in maillists.
>>
>> Define very long time?
>>
>>
>> //Peter
> 
> Please,... just look at the Changelog!  
> 
> quote, first added to the tree: *vixie-cron-4.1 (27 Aug 2004)
> 
> and it has been patched ever since, picking up patches from other
> distros, etc., fixing bugs,...
> 
> Currently at revision 14.
> 
> Plus I don't recall that it be tree-cleaned in this thread, just to
> change the default in the install manual to one that is being developed.
> 

Can we please stop this derailed part of this thread? Please do not let
Peter render another thread useless.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Peter Stuge]

Markos Chandras wrote:
> Please do not let Peter render another thread useless.

Isn't it obvious that the discussion about forks is both related to
cron *and* useful on its own?

It's not really possible to view an entire thread as a single item.
Life is more complicated than that, for good and bad.

Finally, consider that even if what I write makes you personally
uncomfortable it may still be useful for the community as a whole.

You can only decide what is useless for you - and I don't care even
if you think that I'm useless for Gentoo (I didn't say that you've
said so, I am only saying if!) but I do care if you claim that your
opinion is representative of the entire community, as you did above.
That's not cool.


Have a good weekend!

//Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Maciej Mrozowski]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1539 bytes --]

On Sunday 15 of December 2013 00:13:09 Peter Stuge wrote:
| Markos Chandras wrote:
| > Please do not let Peter render another thread useless.
| 
| Isn't it obvious that the discussion about forks is both related to
| cron *and* useful on its own?

I think there's some misunderstanding (or otherwise trolling).
There's no discussion as there are no competing forks. There is discontinued
(judged by upstream and bug activity) project and there is follow-up project.

| It's not really possible to view an entire thread as a single item.
| Life is more complicated than that, for good and bad.
| 
| Finally, consider that even if what I write makes you personally
| uncomfortable it may still be useful for the community as a whole.

In this particular thread, lecturing us on forks (in ex. not always being
automatically profitable), while at the same time likely being unaware of
status of vixie-cron development and its Gentoo maintenance story, then
trying to get what we define as 'dead upstream' in pretentious one-liners like
someone's life depended on it is what Markos called it - useless - not 'personally
uncomfortable'.

| You can only decide what is useless for you - and I don't care even
| if you think that I'm useless for Gentoo (I didn't say that you've
| said so, I am only saying if!) but I do care if you claim that your
| opinion is representative of the entire community, as you did above.
| That's not cool.

Neither is trolling. Please be so kind and discontinue this practice.
Thanks for understanding.

regards
MM

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1160 bytes --]

Dnia 2013-12-15, o godz. 00:13:09
Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> napisał(a):

> Markos Chandras wrote:
> > Please do not let Peter render another thread useless.
> 
> Isn't it obvious that the discussion about forks is both related to
> cron *and* useful on its own?

No, it's not. We may as well consider systemd a cron replacement
and that won't be useful either.

> It's not really possible to view an entire thread as a single item.
> Life is more complicated than that, for good and bad.

Yes, we actually get all the mails and have to filter out the nonsense
and find useful feedback. If it were a single item we could easily
discard...

> Finally, consider that even if what I write makes you personally
> uncomfortable it may still be useful for the community as a whole.

And how is that? Putting random information in middle of mailing list
thread, spread over a few Q/A mails. People who read the ml will be
irritated having to read this, people who don't won't reasonably be
able to find it.

Those were mostly rhetorical questions, so don't bother making more
spam answering them.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 610 bytes --]

13.12.2013 20:08, Peter Stuge пишет:
> Sergey Popov wrote:
>>>>> Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died
>>>>
>>>> If vixie-cron upstream is dead as you say
>>>
>>> Define dead?
>>
>> Bugs are not fixed for a very long time, no answers on private
>> e-mails or in maillists.
> 
> Define very long time?

Will you cavil at every word in this thread?

Fine. Very long time = more that a year without ANY answer from upstream.

-- 
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead
Gentoo Qt project lead
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Pavlos Ratis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 915 bytes --]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:

> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
>
> This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> fixing some bugs :/
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
>
>
I am all for it. I wouldn't say that vixie-cron is dead since it is still
functional, however I would rather say that it is outdated.
In my opinion, cronie, unlike the other cron variants is the most reliable.
Also, many other distributions like Arch[1] and openSUSE[2] have already
switched from vixie-cron to cronie.

Note: We need a new entry for cronie to our Cron wiki page [3]

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/cron
[2] http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Cron_replace
[3] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Cron

Pavlos

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1621 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Lars Wendler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1175 bytes --]

Am Wed, 11 Dec 2013 23:42:03 +0000
schrieb Pavlos Ratis <dastergon@gentoo.org>:

> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
> >
> > This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> > vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook.
> > Last time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie
> > forked it fixing some bugs :/
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> I am all for it. I wouldn't say that vixie-cron is dead since it is
> still functional, however I would rather say that it is outdated.
> In my opinion, cronie, unlike the other cron variants is the most
> reliable. Also, many other distributions like Arch[1] and openSUSE[2]
> have already switched from vixie-cron to cronie.
> 
> Note: We need a new entry for cronie to our Cron wiki page [3]
> 
> [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/cron
> [2] http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Cron_replace
> [3] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Cron
> 
> Pavlos

I've added cronie to our Wiki cron page.

-- 
Lars Wendler
Gentoo package maintainer

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Steven J. Long]

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013, Pavlos Ratis wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013, Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
> >
> > This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> > vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> > time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> > fixing some bugs :/
> >
> > What do you think?

Thanks for bringing it to attention: I've always been happy with vixie-cron,
so never even thought of switching. It's good to know the code is being
maintained, albeit in a fork.

> I am all for it. I wouldn't say that vixie-cron is dead since it is still
> functional, however I would rather say that it is outdated.
> In my opinion, cronie, unlike the other cron variants is the most reliable.

Ah that's good to know: the only hesitation on my part was that fcron appears
more functional, but if someone wants that they can install it themselves,
and this way we get anacron out of the box, and maintained code.

> Also, many other distributions like Arch[1] and openSUSE[2] have already
> switched from vixie-cron to cronie.

Yeah that helps in terms of documentation, collaboration and just knowing
it's not a risky move. I'm all for it, too, especially now Dale's done the
guinea-pig run ;)

Regards,
steveL
-- 
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Recommend cronie instead of vixie-cron in handbook?

[Ultrabug]

On 12/10/2013 09:55 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
>
> This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> time I checked, vixie-cron upstream was died while cronie forked it
> fixing some bugs :/
>
> What do you think?
>
>

+1 here, thx