Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:06:49 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Naming convention for etc/periodic/*/* files? Message-ID: <59386AE9.9040304@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <slrnojgnt8.2e9s.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de> References: <slrnojgnt8.2e9s.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Christian Weisgerber wrote on 2017/06/07 22:18: > What is the naming convention for etc/periodic/*/* files installed > by ports? > > Looking over the ports tree, I see that most adhere to the > NNN.*name* pattern also used in the base system, although it's > unclear how the NNN numbers are assigned and the rest of the name > is somewhat flexible. > > The lone exception is sysutils/smartmontools, which installs > etc/periodic/daily/smart. The numeric prefix is for ordering: 000 start as first, 999 last. Similar actions should be run consecutively. For example all daily status checks are numbered 4xx, all daily cleanups are 1xx. So if some port installs periodic for cleanup it should be named 1xx.name too. The "name" is usually the port name, but some ports can install more than one periodic scripts or the name of the port is not so descriptive as some different name. Miroslav Lachman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?59386AE9.9040304>