Skip to main content

ubuntu 14.04 - Why does crontab store my crontab under /var/spool/cron/crontabs/user instead of /etc/cron.daily




I wanted to create a crontab doing some job for me.
Because my server isn't running 24/7 i decided to use anacron instead.



Ok, so I took a short look into /etc/anacrontab:



1       5       cron.daily      run-parts --report /etc/cron.daily
7       10      cron.weekly     run-parts --report /etc/cron.weekly
@monthly        15      cron.monthly    run-parts --report /etc/cron.monthly



I saw that anacron is already executing the daily/weekly and monthly crontabs.



In my case I want to execute the command on a daily basis, so I focused on the first line where I can clearly see that anacron is executing all scripts in cron.daily every day with a delay of 5 minutes.



So I discarded the idea of creating an anacrontab or more likely an entry in /etc/anacrontab and intended to create a crontab which is placed in cron.daily because anacron will execute every script inside this folder anyway.



Now when I create a "daily"-crontab with:



crontab -e



regarding to man crontab the crontab is placed under var/spool/cron/crontabs/user instead of /etc/cron.daily where I was hoping the get my crontab into cron.daily getting executed by anacron.



The questions




  1. Why is my intention wrong that my crontab is not automatically executed by anacron because it is not placed inside cron.daily.

  2. Is the purpose of cron.daily just to include system and custom scripts and not crontabs itself.

  3. Is the right way to get my job done to place a anacrontab inside etc/anacrontab instead of creating a crontab.



Answer



You should really read the documentation, from man crontab(1)




crontab - maintain crontab files for individual users




The crontab -e command edits the current user's crontab(5) file which is found in (or created in) /var/spool/cron/crontabs/user.




If you want to run a file daily, all you have to do is put it in the /etc/cron.daily directory and ensure that the permissions are correct.



I wouldn't mess around with anacrontab if I were you.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?
Post a Comment
Read more

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,
Post a Comment
Read more

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able
Post a Comment
Read more