On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 02:36:26PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:54:10AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > Are there any seconds to the proposal to create a virtual > > package cron-daemon? The rationale is for packages like logratate, > > which otherwise would need to depend on cron | anacron | fcron | bcron | > > etc. > > Given how anacron works, I think it fails almost all of the requirements > below, so should not be eligible to declare this virtual package. fcron's > Conflicts / description suggest it may have a similar problem. Is this > virtual package still useful in that case?
Maybe I am confused but anacron depends on cron, so a system with anacron installed should provide all the feature of cron, right ? A point of reference: as far as popularity-contest is concerned (one of that package having a dependency on cron) the only feature required is support for /etc/cron.daily. So a case could be made for a cron-daemon virtual package with a much smaller interface. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
