Bob Proulx <b...@proulx.com> writes: > Harry Putnam wrote: >> I'm still not getting the whole picture of what is supposed to happen >> on a machine with both anacron and cron installed. > > And you might be tired of having me respond about it. :-)
Not on your life! I have a certain fondness for descriptive and very helpful posts here. >> I have lines like the one below in /etc/crontab >> >> [...] test -x /usr/sbin/anacron || ( cd / && run-parts --report >> /etc/cron.daily ) >> >> Ok, it tests for the presence of /usr/sbin/anacron, checks that it is >> executable and sees to it that this user has permission to run it. > > Yes. The "this user" part is part that you trimmed off. It runs as > the root user. The root user will always have permission. Let me > show the part you trimmed off. (Times might be different.) I was trying to say... I 'got' all that. But I think your formulation is a bit off. test -x doesn't care who is running what... it checks to see that the soul calling test -x has permission to run the app it is called against... at least, that was my reading of `man test'. But yes, in our subject case it is expected to be root.. >From `man test' -x FILE FILE exists and execute (or search) permission is granted [...] >> But where and when does anacron actually get called to run? >> That line appears to expect anacron to be called somewhere else. > > Yes. The anacron itself is actually called from ... cron! :-) > > $ dpkg -L anacron > /etc/cron.d/anacron > ... Bingo, thank you sir... now it starts to make sense... and thanks too for pointing out what I should have thought of as a way to get a clue using `dpkg -L'. And just a small supplement to help you understand why I didn't quite follow the setup... On the first sign of trouble with logs not getting processed, I checked what state anacron was in with `/etc/init.d/anacron status', which gave a blank <no reply> which made me assume, (apparently wrongly) that anacron was not running. So, I started thinking it was not getting called. [...] > "/etc/init.d/anacron start". Why invoke-rc.d? Because the local > admin may have set up a policy-rc.d configuration that disables it. I was just wondering why `invoke-rc.d', now I get that too, thanks. [...] >> I've never taken any actions on anacron and don't remember even >> installing it purposely... so am I supposed to put it into a run >> level? > I can't believe I didn't recommend to you at some previous time that > you should probably just remove anacron. Do you need it? If not then > remove it. (I would 'purge' it and remove the config files too.) You did, on the very first response to slightly different subject but still involving `cron' and `anacron', might have been on the emacs list though. And about needing anacron. Yes, I guess I'm just the type of user that anacron was designed for. My machine is shut off nearly every day, and sometimes isn't started for a day or two. When it is, there is no rigid pattern time wise. Seems like, if not anacron then I'd need to be a lot more trick and careful with cron scheduling or do some scripting or the like. [...] >> Or, does it get called somewhere else in the cron setup? > > Yes! You have guessed it. > > Also there is apm support. When power is plugged in and unplugged > then anacron is run or stopped. > Interesting... and good to know. It doesn't effect me at the moment but at some point I will probably have debian running on a laptop. Oh, and I hope you do not tire of answering my often poorly worded queries. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ppqw9ok5....@newsguy.com