Bug 181995 - /etc/cron.d seems to be ignored for cronjobs
Summary: /etc/cron.d seems to be ignored for cronjobs
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: vixie-cron
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
high
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jason Vas Dias
QA Contact: Brock Organ
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-02-18 16:11 UTC by Robert Scheck
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-02-20 16:47:02 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Robert Scheck 2006-02-18 16:11:02 UTC
Description of problem:
/etc/cron.d seems to be ignored for cronjobs after upgrading from 4.1-42 to -52, 
because no cronjob from /etc/cron.d is executed (especially the "all 5" and "all 
15 minute" ones).

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
vixie-cron-4.1-52.FC5

How reproducible:
Everytime, see above and below:

echo "*/5 * * * * uptime" > /etc/cron.d/uptime
chmod 600 /etc/cron.d/uptime
service crond reload

I never got an e-mail with the current uptime, which is the case when using -42 
rather -52.

Actual results:
Cronjobs used for vnstat package (Fedora Extras) and further one got completely 
unusable.

Expected results:
Same behaviour like in 4.1-42 again, please...

Comment 1 Jason Vas Dias 2006-02-20 16:47:02 UTC
The syntax used for the cronjob line you use in an /etc/cron.d file is incorrect:
"*/5 * * * * uptime" 
A 'user name' sixth field is required in /etc/cron.d files - this line should 
work:
'
*/5 * * * * root uptime
'

4.1-42 was slightly broken in the way it read /etc/cron.d/* files (Bug 163889),
which might explain why it ran the jobs while -52+ didn't.

I've just tested that this cron job works fine in /etc/cron.d/ :
* * * * * root /bin/date
sends an email every minute OK.

Hence, this bug is being closed as 'NOTABUG'. If you still cannot get the 
uptime job to run after adding the sixth username field, please re-open this bug.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.