gnu@l5.uucp (John Gilmore) (10/09/85)
Shore@adobe.UUCP (Andrew Shore) wrote: > By the way, the man page for cron(8) lies. It says that the > days are numbered 1-7 with 1=Monday. The days are actually > numbered 0-6 with 0=Sunday. I tried it on my Sun and he is incorrect. On a Sunday, I added two entries, one for day 7 and one for day 0, at the same time (a few minutes hence). The one with day 7 ran, with day 0 didn't. QED.
haral@ttidcb.UUCP (Haral Tsitsivas) (10/23/85)
In article <187@l5.uucp> gnu@l5.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: >Shore@adobe.UUCP (Andrew Shore) wrote: >> By the way, the man page for cron(8) lies. It says that the >> days are numbered 1-7 with 1=Monday. The days are actually >> numbered 0-6 with 0=Sunday. > >I tried it on my Sun and he is incorrect. On a Sunday, I added two >entries, one for day 7 and one for day 0, at the same time (a few minutes >hence). The one with day 7 ran, with day 0 didn't. QED. Sunday is 0 on my system (still 4.1 BSD, sigh).
guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) (10/27/85)
> >> By the way, the man page for cron(8) lies. It says that the > >> days are numbered 1-7 with 1=Monday. The days are actually > >> numbered 0-6 with 0=Sunday. > > > >I tried it on my Sun and he is incorrect. On a Sunday, I added two > >entries, one for day 7 and one for day 0, at the same time (a few minutes > >hence). The one with day 7 ran, with day 0 didn't. QED. > > Sunday is 0 on my system (still 4.1 BSD, sigh). I believe the V7 man page lied; it said the days went 1-7 with 1=Monday, when the actually went 0-6 with 0-Sunday. The USG/USDL (people who brought you S3/S5) fixed the man page. The CSRG at UCB (people who brought you 4.xBSD) fixed the *code* in 4.2. They should have known better - if UNIX code and UNIX documentation disagree, 99 times out of 100 (if not more often), the documentation is wrong. Thus, 4.2BSD's "cron" is out of sync with every other "cron" out there. Sigh. (Admittedly, the S5R2 "cron" is also somewhat different; "crontab"s have the same format, but they live in different places and every user gets one of their own, to have, hold, and alter.) Guy Harris
chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) (10/28/85)
In article <2935@sun.uucp> guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) writes: > I believe the V7 man page lied; it said the days went 1-7 with 1=Monday, > when the actually went 0-6 with 0-Sunday. The USG/USDL (people who brought > you S3/S5) fixed the man page. The CSRG at UCB (people who brought you > 4.xBSD) fixed the *code* in 4.2. They should have known better . . . . Do not be too hard on them: at least they did something about it. The solution now is probably to make 0=7=Sunday everywhere. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 4251) UUCP: seismo!umcp-cs!chris CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris@mimsy.umd.edu
levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) (10/29/85)
In article <2935@sun.uucp>, guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) writes: >They should have known better - if UNIX >code and UNIX documentation disagree, 99 times out of 100 (if not more >often), the documentation is wrong. > Guy Harris Rhetorical question: how is "wrong" defined. Does the documentation being "wrong" mean that the way the code is different from the way it is implemen- ted is on purpose? That is, there has to be something that shows that the code was designed that way on purpose to prove that the documentation is "wrong." Of course since the code function is usually documented after it is written :-) then if the documentation and code differ then the documentation is ipso facto, "wrong." -- ------------------------------- Disclaimer: The views contained herein are | dan levy | yvel nad | my own and are not at all those of my em- | an engihacker @ | ployer or the administrator of any computer | at&t computer systems division | upon which I may hack. | skokie, illinois | -------------------------------- Path: ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!levy
trb@haddock.UUCP (10/29/85)
>>>> By the way, the man page for cron(8) lies. It says that the >>>> days are numbered 1-7 with 1=Monday. The days are actually >>>> numbered 0-6 with 0=Sunday. This problem has been around for a long time. Numbering weekdays with Sunday==0 is a pretty alien idea to most of us, I think. As long as we're stuck with cron's day numbering scheme, I'd say that the safe way to fix it is to hack your cron to accept both 0 and 7 for Sunday. Then your documentation will be right, no matter how many times people fix it. Andrew Tannenbaum Interactive Boston, MA 617-247-1155 (Not masscomp!trb, ima!trb. Same person, different address.)
edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (10/29/85)
In article <2935@sun.uucp>, guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) writes: > > >> By the way, the man page for cron(8) lies. It says that the > > >> days are numbered 1-7 with 1=Monday. The days are actually > > >> numbered 0-6 with 0=Sunday. > > > > > >I tried it on my Sun and he is incorrect. On a Sunday, I added two > > >entries, one for day 7 and one for day 0, at the same time (a few minutes > > >hence). The one with day 7 ran, with day 0 didn't. QED. > > > > Sunday is 0 on my system (still 4.1 BSD, sigh). > > I believe the V7 man page lied; it said the days went 1-7 with 1=Monday, > when the actually went 0-6 with 0-Sunday. The USG/USDL (people who brought > you S3/S5) fixed the man page. The CSRG at UCB (people who brought you > 4.xBSD) fixed the *code* in 4.2. They should have known better - if UNIX > code and UNIX documentation disagree, 99 times out of 100 (if not more > often), the documentation is wrong. Thus, 4.2BSD's "cron" is out of sync > with every other "cron" out there. > Guy Harris On our 2.9BSD system, cron treats the days the same way localtime(3) does, 0-6, 0=Sunday. Our manual page did indeed say 1-7, 1=Monday. A quick edit of cron.8 fixed everything. -- Edward C. Bennett UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward /* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */ "Goodnight M.A."
geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) (10/31/85)
In article <2006@umcp-cs.UUCP> chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes: >The solution now is probably to make 0=7=Sunday everywhere. I should probably keep my mouth shut until it's done, but I can't stand this discussion. I hope to be putting my new "supercron" out to a few beta sites in a couple of months. Since I'm a wild extremist radical who believes computers should bend to the convenience of mankind, it doesn't take EITHER 0 or 7 for Sunday. It takes "Sun". (Except in "furrin" places, where a #define lets you put in your own language's abbreviations). -- Geoff Kuenning {hplabs,ihnp4}!trwrb!desint!geoff
leif@erisun.UUCP (Leif Samuelsson) (11/10/85)
In article <2006@umcp-cs.UUCP> chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes: >> I believe the V7 man page lied; it said the days went 1-7 with 1=Monday, >> when the actually went 0-6 with 0-Sunday. The USG/USDL (people who brought >> you S3/S5) fixed the man page. The CSRG at UCB (people who brought you >> 4.xBSD) fixed the *code* in 4.2. They should have known better . . . . > >Do not be too hard on them: at least they did something about it. > >The solution now is probably to make 0=7=Sunday everywhere. If anyone decides to write a brand new version of Unix, then this should be put straight once and for all. It is now over 15 years since ISO decided that Monday is the first day of the week. Hence, we can number the days 0-6 or 1-7, but Monday should be first! Leif Samuelsson Ericsson Information Systems AB ..enea!erix!erisun!leif Advanced Workstations Division S-172 93 SUNDBYBERG 59 19 N / 17 57 E SWEDEN
larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) (11/12/85)
> (Admittedly, the S5R2 "cron" is > also somewhat different; "crontab"s have the same format, but they live in > different places and every user gets one of their own, to have, hold, and > alter.) I had a lot of "fun" with the new `cron' arrangement when we upgraded our 3B2 to Sys V Release 2. Since I had many things on my mind to get our upgraded machine back into service, I never CAREFULLY read the doc's on crontab use to discover the ``crontab'' COMMAND. So, I merely edited the default file for /usr/spool/cron/crontabs/root with my additional crontab entries - which promptly did not work. I tried this several times, and no matter what I put in that crontab file, nothing would execute unless I rebooted the system. Even the AT&T Hotline did not know what was wrong. Finally, I discovered the ``crontab'' COMMAND and READ the manual page. Success - it worked. My question: does anyone know why simply editing the particular crontab file will not work, and why the crontab command MUST be used? === Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York === === UUCP {decvax,dual,rocksanne,rocksvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry === === VOICE 716/741-9185 {rice,shell}!baylor!/ === === FAX 716/741-9635 {AT&T 3510D} ihnp4!/ === === === === "Have you hugged your cat today?" ===
medin@noscvax.UUCP (Ted Medin) (11/14/85)
In article <379@erisun.UUCP> leif@erisun.UUCP (Leif Samuelsson) writes: >In article <2006@umcp-cs.UUCP> chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes: >>> I believe the V7 man page lied; it said the days went 1-7 with 1=Monday, >>> when the actually went 0-6 with 0-Sunday. The USG/USDL (people who brought >>> you S3/S5) fixed the man page. The CSRG at UCB (people who brought you >>> 4.xBSD) fixed the *code* in 4.2. They should have known better . . . . >> >>Do not be too hard on them: at least they did something about it. >> >>The solution now is probably to make 0=7=Sunday everywhere. > >If anyone decides to write a brand new version of Unix, then >this should be put straight once and for all. It is now over 15 >years since ISO decided that Monday is the first day of the >week. Hence, we can number the days 0-6 or 1-7, but Monday >should be first! > For several hundred years sunday has been the first day of the week. Look at any calandar.
edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (11/19/85)
In article <573@kitty.UUCP>, larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) writes: > My question: does anyone know why simply editing the particular crontab > file will not work, and why the crontab command MUST be used? > > === Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York === On our 3B20 we found that the only way to get cron to reread /usr/spool/cron/crontabs/* was to kill and restart /etc/cron. -- Edward C. Bennett UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward /* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */ "Goodnight M.A."
overlord@nmtvax.UUCP (11/25/85)
>>this should be put straight once and for all. It is now over 15 >>years since ISO decided that Monday is the first day of the >>week. Hence, we can number the days 0-6 or 1-7, but Monday >>should be first! >> > For several hundred years sunday has been the first day of the >week. Look at any calandar. That was rather closeminded and uninformed. For your information many (most?) European calanders start with monday and have saturday and sunday (the weekEND) at the end of the week. Just because most US calandars start with sunday doesn't mean they all do! Alan Kerr New Mexico Tech -- ...{convex,ucbvax,gatech,csu-cs,anl-mcs}!unmvax!nmtvax!overlord ...{purdue,cmc12}!lanl!nmtvax!overlord
mike@rlvd.UUCP (Mike Woods) (11/25/85)
In article <100@noscvax.UUCP> medin@cod.UUCP (Ted medin) writes: >In article <379@erisun.UUCP> leif@erisun.UUCP (Leif Samuelsson) writes: >>If anyone decides to write a brand new version of Unix, then >>this should be put straight once and for all. It is now over 15 >>years since ISO decided that Monday is the first day of the >>week. Hence, we can number the days 0-6 or 1-7, but Monday >>should be first! >> > For several hundred years sunday has been the first day of the >week. Look at any calandar. For at least the last two and a half thousand years Sunday has been the first day of the week. How on Earth can ISO decide to run counter to the whole (well almost) of humanity and announce that Monday is the "standard" first day of the week. I find this somewhat pathetic. Mike Woods. -- UK JANET: mike@uk.ac.rl.vd UUCP: ..!mcvax!ukc!rlvd!mike
tim@ISM780B.UUCP (11/28/85)
Come on, guys! Everyone knows that Saturday is 0, Sunday is 1, ... Friday is 6. Tim Smith ihnp4!cithep!tim ima!ism780!tim
andersa@kuling.UUCP (Anders Andersson) (11/29/85)
In article <883@nmtvax.UUCP> overlord@nmtvax.UUCP (Alan Kerr) writes: >>>this should be put straight once and for all. It is now over 15 >>>years since ISO decided that Monday is the first day of the >>>week. Hence, we can number the days 0-6 or 1-7, but Monday >>>should be first! >(the weekEND) at the end of the week. Just because most US calandars start >with sunday doesn't mean they all do! So THAT is the reason the numerical representation for the weekdays was "inappropriately" defined from the very beginning!? Oh well... Now as we seem to agree about facts, can we decide whether there is reason enough to *change* the original definition in an existing operating system, as was suggested in the first place? If there is any risk for incompatibility with earlier software, I'm afraid that would do more harm than good, but perhaps some systems development expert could make out the details? -- Anders Andersson, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University, Sweden Phone: +46 18 183170 UUCP: andersa@kuling.UUCP (...!{seismo,mcvax}!enea!kuling!andersa)
jo@epistemi.UUCP (Jo Calder) (11/30/85)
In article <947@rlvd.UUCP> mike@rlvd.UUCP (Mike Woods) writes: > >For at least the last two and a half thousand years Sunday has been >the first day of the week. How on Earth can ISO decide to run >counter to the whole (well almost) of humanity and announce that >Monday is the "standard" first day of the week. I find this somewhat >pathetic. > >Mike Woods. >-- > >UK JANET: mike@uk.ac.rl.vd >UUCP: ..!mcvax!ukc!rlvd!mike Try telling that to the Chinese. There are considerably more of them than there are USENET users, and they all say a rough equivalent of week1 ...... week6 Monday Saturday Sunday doesn't follow the above pattern, but then nothing is perfect. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Calder, University of Edinburgh, Centre for Cognitive Science, 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9LW, Scotland ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!cstvax!epistemi!jo You run your mouth and I'll run my business.
mulligan@u-mt.UUCP (J. Scott Mulligan) (12/02/85)
In article <947@rlvd.UUCP>, mike@rlvd.UUCP (Mike Woods) writes: . . > For at least the last two and a half thousand years Sunday has been > the first day of the week. . . > ...I find this somewhat pathetic. > > Mike Woods. > -- > UK JANET: mike@uk.ac.rl.vd > UUCP: ..!mcvax!ukc!rlvd!mike What I find pathetic is the fact that we seem to have so many "professional" people littering the net with this discussion. C'mon folks, who really CARES? What possible difference does it make whether we put a '0' or a '7' in our crontab for Sunday?
jso@edison.UUCP (John Owens) (12/03/85)
> Now as we seem to agree about facts, can we decide whether there is > reason enough to *change* the original definition in an existing > operating system, as was suggested in the first place? If there is > any risk for incompatibility with earlier software, I'm afraid that > would do more harm than good, but perhaps some systems development > expert could make out the details? > -- > Anders Andersson, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University, Sweden If anyone is planning on changing cron, don't just change the numbers! Leave the numbers the same so you don't confuse everyone, and allow "Mon", "Tue",... Also, "Jan", "Feb", etc... -- John Owens General Electric Company Phone: (804) 978-5726 Factory Automated Products Division Compuserve: 76317,2354 decvax!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs ...!{ gatech!allegra!uvacs }!edison!jso ihnp4!houxm