Re: [Stretch] apt-get has no updates?
On Fri 30 Jun 2017 at 15:43:45 (-0400), Fungi4All wrote:
> > From: wooledg@eeg.ccf.org
> > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 06:34:49PM +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote:
> >> If you want to
> >> prevent automatic upgrades and disable them, because you want to do it
> >> manually like you are used to, you should edit file
> >> /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/20auto-upgrades and change it from this:
> >>
> >> APT::Periodic::Update-Package-Lists "1";
> >> APT::Periodic::Unattended-Upgrade "1";
> >>
> >> to this:
> >>
> >> APT::Periodic::Update-Package-Lists "0";
> >> APT::Periodic::Unattended-Upgrade "0";
> > Or you can just remove the unattended-upgrades package, right?
>
> If someone installed Stretch from scratch last week got the unattended-upgrades
> package but those who were running stretch for a while before it became
> stable did not get it and have to install it. Would this be correct, because
> I've had several updated packages since then.
> I'm writing this from a different system so I can not go back and actually
> check but I am wondering how it works security wise. I assume it runs
> as a timed service through systemd and has admin privileges.
> The question that sticks to mind, if the above assumptions are correct,
> is how did this got to stable without really being advertised properly
> through those running testing. I was under the impression that for
> anything other than security-bug-fixes everything goes through the
> unstable and testing first. This seems as something that appeared
> behind us. An update of apt/synaptics/aptitude could have included
> the option to consciously choose between auto or manual updates.
I'm not sure what this is all about; unattended-upgrades appears
to have been maintained by the same person since the days of etch,
a decade ago. What constitutes an advertisement, and how is the
question posed as to whether updates are automatic or not?
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: