On 02/25/2013 12:40 PM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:

On 02/25/2013 12:41 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:

...

Greetings

I have been looking into cron jobs in the distribution and I noticed that there dont seem to be any packaging guidelines for packaging cron jobs in the distribution.

More or less every package that ships cron jobs does not require Cronie which arguably it should, however only few packages actually strictly need cron ( logwatch,leafnote etc ) while the majority of them are more or less small administration task that can be triggered manually by the user/administrator thus not strictly required by the component.

Before I start providing patches to fix this I need to know what is the correct way to move forward as in...

Should the requirement on Cronie be added to the spec file?

or

Should those cron-jobs be package in a separate sub package which would depend on Cronie?

Thanks JBG -- packaging mailing list packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

We have more cron implementation. Correctly should all packages require dailyjobs or /etc/cron.d if they want to run cronjob by cronie or fcron. Other packages usually don't mention dependencies from core installation like cron, syslog, etc. because they incorrectly believe they will be always there.

Agreed affected components for cron are just around the 100 mark while rsyslog or syslog-ng ones are around 600

Which patches do you want to provide? We have a planning process for wide system changes.

This is not what I consider system wide change *unless* fpc would decide it should be package in a separated subpackage which means change in usage behavior and users would have to install that subpackage to get the previous behavior so our opinion of it being systemd wide might differ in that regard.

It would only be one line changes to packages spec files that put cron jobs in the cron directory as in a requirement on cronie which is currently lacking and should have been fixed/done when it was decided for it to be the default by it's maintainer and or fpc with guidelines and the relevant maintainers themselves .

And as far as I know we neither ship dcron nor vixie-cron which are the other ones that provide a crond daemon binary so I'm not sure how or why fcron is relative to this discussion.

In anycase we first need to settle on the proper way forward for the affected components before I start working on something so my efforts wont be in vain because it was decide to do something else.

JBG

On 02/25/2013 12:51 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:

Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:

...

Should the requirement on Cronie be added to the spec file? or Should those cron-jobs be package in a separate sub package which would depend on Cronie?

Is the running of cron jobs essential to the proper function of any current package? If not, personally, I'd rather not worry too much about adding dependencies and consider it optional.

There are few affected components that have a hard dependency on cron binary being in place and in general from my pov no package should ever *expect* anything to be available since I personally think doing so is a bad workflow but other might disagree in that regard.

JBG