"Could cron be fixed? Although almost all current implementation of cron are open source, cron's pathological behavior has been petrified into the Unix standards. So if it isn't broken, it isn't cron. The only solution left is a work-around."
4 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 81 previous comments
- No, I already dealt with consumption vs waste when I mentioned a bunch of things that waste a hell of a lot more energy than sleeping computers.
And similarly, if you're worrying about the pollution from your one cigarette stub while you're tossing your old mercury batteries in the trash, you're failing to keep a proper sense of perspective.
The fact that the Xbox defaults to "stay on" versus "sleep" is totally a bad thing. However, it's completely irrelevant to a discussion of "turn off" versus "sleep".May 29, 2012
- The only reason that cron is "everywhere" (for "everywhere" read "the places that call themselves Unix") is because the crontab manpage, and the pathological behaviours of cron in processing generated crontab files, were included in the Single Unix Specification. Were the SUS to be updated to include launchd.plist's manpage, it too would end up "everywhere" as well.
Interestingly I note that if you removed cron, rewrote crontab to create launchd.plist's that mimic cron's specific behaviours, then you would still pass a SUS check on crontab.May 30, 2012
- Circular reasoning. The reason that cron is in the SUS is because it's everywhere.May 30, 2012
- then by all means let's update the sus spec so that unix-like systems can have whatever improvements you think are needed. just note that 'vixie cron' is one author's take on the old SVID cron, with a few enhancements, but that it tracks the POSIX spec for its core features and compatibility.May 30, 2012
- Well, obviously XML plist files would make cron more enterprisey.May 30, 2012
- If there's one thing worse than XML, it's ordered XML.May 30, 2012