On Fri, 26.11.10 02:07, Miloslav Trmač (mitr(a)volny.cz) wrote:
Lennart Poettering píše v Pá 26. 11. 2010 v 01:27 +0100:
> On Thu, 25.11.10 17:33, Tomas Mraz (tmraz(a)redhat.com) wrote:
> And also, cron does a couple of really nasty things. For example it
> wakes up in regular intervals to check if a job is ready to run. It does
> so to deal with wallclock time changes/suspends. In systemd we are
> working on a different way to solve this, so that we can actually sleep
> as long as possible, and don't have to wake up in regular
Great. You can fix cron then, this does not mean it is necessary to
integrate the two.
Well, I actually believe we should design an OS here, not just a set of
independent tools. And that means I think closer integration is good and
only has benefits.
> To summarize this: the current logic of cron is not pretty. And
> duplicates process spawning and babysitting which already exists in way
> too many daemons,
I think you'll find the execution of processes is a comparatively small
part of cron.
Well, and that's why it is also very limited.
And anyway, "process spawning and babysitting" will
_always_ exist in many different daemons, unless you want to run the
whole system within a single systemd process.
Sure, no doubt about that. But unifying this for system stuff is a good
thing, not a bad thing.
It would be much much better for the ecosystem to extract these
of systemd into a library (perhaps standalone, perhaps interacting
with the system-wide systemd runtime) that can be used in any other
process that needs to run a task in a separately tracked "daemon
Well, I don't think that that technically makes any sense. Sorry.
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.