That line generated an "atrun not found" error message. I assume that means that line needs to be modified to work with at. If so, what should it look like?
> -----Original Message----- > From: Hugo Villeneuve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 4:04 PM > To: Dave Beckstrom > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: DOS Attacks? > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 03:26:40PM -0500, Dave Beckstrom wrote: > > Greg, > > > > I believe the problem has already been solved thanks to some help from a > > gentleman who sent me some information privately. > > > > I won't know for certain for a day or two but I am optimistic. > > > > I want to thank the people who responded with some suggestions for > debugging > > and things to try. > > > > I'm going to unsubscribe from the list now. > > > > Nobody was able to tell me how to replace the functionality of the > > > > " */10 * * * * /usr/libexec/atrun" > > > > line in my cron file. I had read the man pages regarding "at" before I > > asked the question but I didn't fully understand how "at" might replace > > atrun. So if someone cares to help on that last question please shoot > me a > > private email. > > > > Have a great day everyone. > > Did "at" jobs stop working without that line? > > No, 'cause the atrun functionnality was merged into cron since OpenBSD > 3.2. > > Welcome to 2002. > > > -- > Hugo Villeneuve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://EINTR.net/
