Bug 60962
Summary: | Cron file location | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | Karl schmidt <karl> |
Component: | crontabs | Assignee: | Jens Petersen <petersen> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Brock Organ <borgan> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 7.2 | CC: | jkeating, mharris |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2002-04-23 08:18:41 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Karl schmidt
2002-03-10 18:58:18 UTC
Do you propose the same for each other users crontabs? What if they don't have write access to /etc, this could cause problems. Why not just backup the /var/spool/cron directory as well as /etc. I don't see this as an issue. The reason this is an issue is that taring (-xzf) up /root and /etc SHOULD backup all the configuration settings other than those of users. If it is a personal crontab it should be kept under that persons home directory. The other place that make sense to keep the root users crontab is under the /root directory. Perhaps you might want symbolic links back to the /etc tree. The point is that the design of the directory structure should help separate out backup items - all user configs should be some where under /home and all system wide configs should be under /etc. The other one that needs more thought is weather the hardware specific items (/etc/sysconfig) should be in their own directory tree along with the rpm database. Using this system one SHOULD be able to load a new system load any unique software then restore /etc, /root, and /home and everything should run like it did before. The uniformity of the use of directories is what makes RedHat my distribution of choice; any thing that causes settings to be under a variety of directory trees reduces maintainability. I would also like to point to one of RedHats own documents http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-7.2-Manual/ref-guide/s1-filesystem-fhs.html And The FHS standard keepers that RedHat has endorsed. http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.2/fhs-5.1.html seem to support this as an issue. You will see that Var is for /var contains variable data files. This includes spool directories and files, administrative and logging data, and transient and temporary files. Further reading will point out that /var/spool contains data which is awaiting some kind of later processing a definition that crontab fails to meet. Dont you think that the crontab file is a configuration file? I dont see how crontab, as a user editable file that defines system operation can belong in /var/spool with the definition given by FHS. Actually, I feel that crontabs *are* files that are waiting for processing. And they are variable, and dynamic. Plus, since each user's crontab will go to /var/spool/cron/ this lends itself to easier backup procedures. I still don't see this as an issue, but I guess we will wait for an official answer from Red Hat. Since it has been the same way since time out of mind, I doubt it will change any time soon. The crontab files in /var/spool, are NOT user editable crontab files. They are files submitted to cron which are spooled. The system crontab file is /etc/crontab, and it runs the various jobs in the /etc/cron.* directories as needed. Per user crontab files are not stored in any particular location, or with any particular filename. The files in /var/spool are just spool files of the user's current submission. I missed this the first time through...
>Further reading will point out that /var/spool contains data which is awaiting
>some kind of later processing a definition that crontab fails to meet. Don't
>you think that the crontab file is a configuration file?
The crontab files in /var/spool are spooled cron jobs, much like when
a user prints something, it gets spooled into /var/spool/lpd or wherever.
They are absolutely _not_ configuration files.
This is getting into semantics here the crontab file looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, has webbed feet, quacks like a duck Are you really saying that crontab not a configuration file? Of course not ; because it is. The fact is, a user configures a crontab. And one CAN edit the crontab (remember crontab e ) There is no intention to edit print spool or mail data that is what makes it spool data it is finished data, not intended to be changed. Its data cued up on its way somewhere. You just cant say the same about a crontab. /var/spool is for DATA that is awaiting processing -- now if you want to say that the crontab is data waiting to be processed then so is every script and program. E-mail is data waiting to be delivered; print spool is data waiting for a printer. A crontab is semi-permanent (like all conf files) and never goes away even through reboot. As someone who has spent time in both the M$ and Linux worlds, I see that redhat has quite an advantage in the ease of recreating a system if there has been respect to the FHS. I just dont like seeing a sloppy foundation laid here. The argument that it would be problematic in a network/logon environment fails to pass the waving arms test I can see there is a problem but to mess up the FHS with a kluge workaround is not a good long term solution. I can imagine a system where users crontabs would be in something like a /home/user/.etc directory and then read by the cron daemon (at boot and also after any user does a crontab e) when it would be COPIED into a combined cron list under /var/cron (or should it be in /proc or /tmp?). What I am really saying, is regardless how many times you choose to reopen this bug report, it will be reclosed NOTABUG, because it is not a bug, and will not be changed. If you want this changed, then contact the Linux Standards Base, and other relevant standards bodies and wail your story to them. We do not change things like this on the whim of a user who doesn't understand the system, merely because the user is persistant and continously reopens bug reports. Bugzilla isn't a technical support forum, nor is it a forum for debate, or discussion. It is a bug report and bug tracking database, and this is not a bug report. End of story. |