Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'For Server . . .' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
For Server . . .
Authored by: Shawn Parr on Nov 19, '04 12:37:36PM
If you use OS X server you can actually do this in a different way, that is slightly better.
/etc/periodic
Allows you to put in multiple scripts starting with a number to prioritize them.

As an example on my server systems I put this same script in the following location:

/etc/periodic/weekly/900.weekly.repairpermissions
So that it runs weekly, and is the last script run.

The periodic folder appears in OS X Client, but when I tried using it the scripts there never ran.

[ Reply to This | # ]

For Server . . .
Authored by: gneagle on Nov 19, '04 12:48:11PM

Periodic works fine on OS X client as well - there must have been another problem.
Make sure the script has the executable bit set, or periodic will silently skip it.



[ Reply to This | # ]
For Client . . .
Authored by: subscriber3 on Nov 19, '04 01:31:33PM

in OS X client the default system crontab does not use the weekly folder; it uses an alias named weekly which points to the default weekly job contained in the folder. to use the weekly folder you have to edit the crontab.



[ Reply to This | # ]
For Client . . .
Authored by: adrianm on Nov 20, '04 02:42:31AM
You sure you have to edit the crontab? my 'system' crontab for root is empty but /etc/crontab contains

15      3       *       *       *       root    periodic daily
30      4       *       *       6       root    periodic weekly
30      5       1       *       *       root    periodic monthly
The /etc/weekly symlink does indeed point to periodic/weekly/500.weekly, but it doesn't seem to have any effect on the periodic program.

Just put a script in the appropriate directory, make it executable and check your script return code (it is important). As always RTFM; in this case, man periodoc.

[ Reply to This | # ]